Re: Video on the new Magnum Force F/M/J suspension upgrade.
[Re: migsBIG]
#2270660
03/16/17 05:58 PM
03/16/17 05:58 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 300 MA
Greg55_99
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 300
MA
|
|
|
|
Re: Video on the new Magnum Force F/M/J suspension upgrade.
[Re: migsBIG]
#2271128
03/17/17 01:19 PM
03/17/17 01:19 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 119 Jacksonville , Fl
Volare4life
member
|
member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 119
Jacksonville , Fl
|
He was asking how much it is, and that $3,800 price tag is the base model and you xan plus or minus here or there, but I'll wait to see some real world testing and beating on first before I commit, there's a lot more I can do with the car for that kind of $$$$$, bit it looks like a really nice and simple set up for a weekend project
The answers are out there you just got to look hard enough
|
|
|
Re: Video on the new Magnum Force F/M/J suspension upgrade.
[Re: migsBIG]
#2271155
03/17/17 02:01 PM
03/17/17 02:01 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,696 Bitopia
jcc
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
|
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,696
Bitopia
|
The "don't crush the frame rails by over tightening" warning is a design shortcoming, IMO. It at first glance it does not appear to be undersized on member/webes thickness, How that effects over weight gain or loss, I have no idea.
Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.
|
|
|
Re: Video on the new Magnum Force F/M/J suspension upgrade.
[Re: migsBIG]
#2271448
03/17/17 11:01 PM
03/17/17 11:01 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,074 Manitoba Canada
67autocross
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,074
Manitoba Canada
|
If it was made out of balsa wood and paper mache it would be still better than the factory FJM front suspension.
A new iron curtain drawn across the 49th parallel
|
|
|
Re: Video on the new Magnum Force F/M/J suspension upgrade.
[Re: Kern Dog]
#2271545
03/18/17 02:15 AM
03/18/17 02:15 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 18,678 Fresno, CA
Jim_Lusk
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 18,678
Fresno, CA
|
This is one case where I can see the value of an aftermarket front suspension. The problem is, how many people build these cars? Here in CA and possibly in other states, Every F/M/J car is a 1976 and newer, requiring it to be smog tested with all original type engine and components. Theres not a lot to get excited about with a 150 HP 318 in a 3600 lb car. I won't comment on the suspension system, but a nice Aspen R/T or Volare Road Runner would be a great candidate for a late model drive train...
Last edited by Jim_Lusk; 03/18/17 02:16 AM.
|
|
|
Re: Video on the new Magnum Force F/M/J suspension upgrade.
[Re: moparx]
#2271645
03/18/17 10:50 AM
03/18/17 10:50 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,696 Bitopia
jcc
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
|
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,696
Bitopia
|
The "don't crush the frame rails by over tightening" warning is a design shortcoming, IMO. for an extra couple of minutes, and an extra few cents, slugs with through holes could have been included that would allow one to tighten those bolts as they should be tightened. there also appears to be ample room to drill one hole oversize and insert those slugs into the rails from either side. that would make a sizeable improvement in structural strength in my opinion, since this is a "bolt on" setup compared to a "weld in" deal. , so obvious, not sure why it was not addressed by the designer.
Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.
|
|
|
Re: Video on the new Magnum Force F/M/J suspension upgrade.
[Re: migsBIG]
#2271648
03/18/17 10:55 AM
03/18/17 10:55 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 25,050 Texas
GoodysGotaCuda
5.7L Hemi, 6spd
|
5.7L Hemi, 6spd
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 25,050
Texas
|
I still haven't seen quantitative results on any of these kits that show the benefits. The benefits are always sold as "better", "chromoly", "coilovers"...yea yea. Performance results? Kinematic improvement references [bump steer, camber curve, rollcenter migration, roll center changes, etc.]? How about manufacturing, what do the welding fixtures for these look like? How is the quality and accuracy checked before it is sent out?....Nada, they're sold on the premise that they are expensive and use coilovers so that must be better.. Hence why I just put Hotchkis parts on my car and am moving forward.
|
|
|
Re: Video on the new Magnum Force F/M/J suspension upgrade.
[Re: migsBIG]
#2271668
03/18/17 11:37 AM
03/18/17 11:37 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,889 up yours
Supercuda
About to go away
|
About to go away
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,889
up yours
|
I'm with Goody
As for California emissions, last time I looked there was wiggle room there. Key is "engine replacement" vs "engine swap".
An engine swap would be putting a family of engine in it that was never an option. Like a 440 or any variation of Hemi.
Engine replacement would be putting an LA in where and LA was, like a 360 to replace a 318. As long as the 360 still sports all the original 318's emissions gear it is legal and no special requirements exist.
If you put a 440 in then you have to use a pass car 440 of same or newer year manufacture with all the 440's original emissions equipment then you need a BAR referee to verify and approve the swap.
A Diplomat with a 360 is fun, BTDT.
As for handling, every one bangs on the transverse torsion bar setup. I never had an issue with it's handling under performing for me. Anyone here actually have a personal example of this?
They say there are no such thing as a stupid question. They say there is always the exception that proves the rule. Don't be the exception.
|
|
|
Re: Video on the new Magnum Force F/M/J suspension upgrade.
[Re: GoodysGotaCuda]
#2271742
03/18/17 01:11 PM
03/18/17 01:11 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,394 Pikes Peak Country
TC@HP2
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,394
Pikes Peak Country
|
Here in CA and possibly in other states, Every F/M/J car is a 1976 and newer, requiring it to be smog tested with all original type engine and components. Fortunately, not everywhere is CA and these cars are going up in popularity, and unfortunately, price, as other locales allowing mods mean these are more reasonably priced entry points into the mopar world. It used to be solid driver F body used to be available for $2-3k. They are now $6-10 depending on version and some Kit Cars and Super Coupes are over $15k. I still haven't seen quantitative results on any of these kits that show the benefits. The benefits are always sold as "better", "chromoly", "coilovers"...yea yea.
Performance results? Kinematic improvement references [bump steer, camber curve, rollcenter migration, roll center changes, etc.]? How about manufacturing, what do the welding fixtures for these look like? How is the quality and accuracy checked before it is sent out?....Nada, they're sold on the premise that they are expensive and use coilovers so that must be better..
You forgot new, which also means its better. A large percentage of buyers aren't going to ask for the data. They take it at face value as there are still a high percentage of people out there that don't question technical terminology.
|
|
|
Re: Video on the new Magnum Force F/M/J suspension upgrade.
[Re: migsBIG]
#2272011
03/18/17 09:20 PM
03/18/17 09:20 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,074 Manitoba Canada
67autocross
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,074
Manitoba Canada
|
Can't really see them selling more than a few of these front end kits, the front end would be more money than the average FJM car is worth. It's still nice of them to build these as those cars get no support from the aftermarket.
A new iron curtain drawn across the 49th parallel
|
|
|
Re: Video on the new Magnum Force F/M/J suspension upgrade.
[Re: migsBIG]
#2272040
03/18/17 10:38 PM
03/18/17 10:38 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 119 Jacksonville , Fl
Volare4life
member
|
member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 119
Jacksonville , Fl
|
And it's an ultra basic design that I think could easily be replicated, I just understand why it's not welded in when they warn you it may crush the frame rail
The answers are out there you just got to look hard enough
|
|
|
Re: Video on the new Magnum Force F/M/J suspension upgrade.
[Re: Supercuda]
#2272123
03/19/17 01:37 AM
03/19/17 01:37 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 18,678 Fresno, CA
Jim_Lusk
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 18,678
Fresno, CA
|
I'm with Goody
As for California emissions, last time I looked there was wiggle room there. Key is "engine replacement" vs "engine swap".
An engine swap would be putting a family of engine in it that was never an option. Like a 440 or any variation of Hemi.
Engine replacement would be putting an LA in where and LA was, like a 360 to replace a 318. As long as the 360 still sports all the original 318's emissions gear it is legal and no special requirements exist.
If you put a 440 in then you have to use a pass car 440 of same or newer year manufacture with all the 440's original emissions equipment then you need a BAR referee to verify and approve the swap.
A Diplomat with a 360 is fun, BTDT.
As for handling, every one bangs on the transverse torsion bar setup. I never had an issue with it's handling under performing for me. Anyone here actually have a personal example of this? Not even close. The rules are that the engine MUST be the same year (any size, even one that was not available or even from the same manufacturer) to retain the emissions as the car or engine was originally equipped. No engine that is older than the vehicle is legal. Any engine that is newer than the vehicle must retain the emissions from the year of the engine. People have been burned with generic replacement engines, but most smog mechanics in the past didn't worry about the year of the block as long as it "looked" stock for the way the car left the factory.
Last edited by Jim_Lusk; 03/19/17 01:37 AM.
|
|
|
Re: Video on the new Magnum Force F/M/J suspension upgrade.
[Re: migsBIG]
#2272401
03/19/17 03:49 PM
03/19/17 03:49 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,394 Pikes Peak Country
TC@HP2
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,394
Pikes Peak Country
|
Sure, in stock form, most these old cars suck. The FJM cars will respond to the same mods applied to all the earlier cars and can be made to be quite fast and powerful. My last Aspen ran low 12s in Denver, which was a good measure better than more desireble muscle era cars turning 14-18s. And I accomplished it for a quarter of the price, so it all depends on what you want.
Even with their current rising prices, they can still provide a means to V8, RWD performance for less than a 2nd mortgage. While they are not everyone's cup of tea, and aren't regulated everywhere like they are in CA, that's fine. If we were all alike, we'd all have mustangs.
|
|
|
Re: Video on the new Magnum Force F/M/J suspension upgrade.
[Re: 67autocross]
#2272404
03/19/17 03:57 PM
03/19/17 03:57 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,421 Michigan
MarkZ
Worthy
|
Worthy
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,421
Michigan
|
If it was made out of balsa wood and paper mache it would be still better than the factory FJM front suspension. I can believe that if there wasn't aftermarket torsion bars and steering boxes available for these. Traverse-t cars have every bit the same aftermarket support as a B body now a days. My M has the FF 300# bars in it, a Borgeson box, FF tubular upper arms, solid K isolators, cop bars and modern tires. It out handles a lot of new vehicles. **Edit - quoted wrong post **
Last edited by MarkM; 03/20/17 10:58 AM.
1987 Fifth Avenue - 512/518/D60
|
|
|
Re: Video on the new Magnum Force F/M/J suspension upgrade.
[Re: Kern Dog]
#2272696
03/20/17 12:42 AM
03/20/17 12:42 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 18,678 Fresno, CA
Jim_Lusk
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 18,678
Fresno, CA
|
Also in CA, if the car only came with a 318, a 440 is still not a legal swap even if it is stock or has LESS measureable emissions than the 318. It is perfectly legal as long as the 440 is the same year or newer than the vehicle AND retains the original emissions equipment for the 440.
|
|
|
Re: Video on the new Magnum Force F/M/J suspension upgrade.
[Re: Kern Dog]
#2272763
03/20/17 03:00 AM
03/20/17 03:00 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 12,375 SoCal
MuuMuu101
I got lucky at Woodward!
|
I got lucky at Woodward!
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 12,375
SoCal
|
I thought the swap was only legal if the 440 was an optional engine in the car. Nope, you could put any brand, any make so long as it's newer and has the original emissions equipment. If it doesn't have the original emissions equipment, it has to be inspected by a smog referee.
|
|
|
Re: Video on the new Magnum Force F/M/J suspension upgrade.
[Re: Kern Dog]
#2272768
03/20/17 03:13 AM
03/20/17 03:13 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 18,678 Fresno, CA
Jim_Lusk
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 18,678
Fresno, CA
|
I thought the swap was only legal if the 440 was an optional engine in the car. Nope, any engine from any manufacturer, but must be the same year or newer and retain the original emissions equipment. Now, we did a 5.2 Magnum swap into an '84 Ramcharger, but it would have been no different to do a 5.9 or even a 5.7, 6.1, LS1, etc. A swap like that must go to a referee who does not determine if the car is clean, but that it has all the correct equipment. They make a new sticker for the vehicle. In our case the Ramcharger would forever be smogged as a '96 Dakota. Then a smog station determines if all is working.
|
|
|
Re: Video on the new Magnum Force F/M/J suspension upgrade.
[Re: migsBIG]
#2272852
03/20/17 10:57 AM
03/20/17 10:57 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,889 up yours
Supercuda
About to go away
|
About to go away
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,889
up yours
|
My understanding is that pass car swaps require pass car engines, not truck engines. At some point the emissions certifications were different with trucks getting more slack hence the requirement.
They say there are no such thing as a stupid question. They say there is always the exception that proves the rule. Don't be the exception.
|
|
|
Re: Video on the new Magnum Force F/M/J suspension upgrade.
[Re: MarkZ]
#2274953
03/23/17 07:10 PM
03/23/17 07:10 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,394 Pikes Peak Country
TC@HP2
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,394
Pikes Peak Country
|
I can believe that if there wasn't aftermarket torsion bars and steering boxes available for these. Traverse-t cars have every bit the same aftermarket support as a B body now a days.
My M has the FF 300# bars in it, a Borgeson box, FF tubular upper arms, solid K isolators, cop bars and modern tires. It out handles a lot of new vehicles. Yes, but the price on the FJM bars is twice that is the straight bar systems. Plus, you still have the t-bar acting as both spring and locating device, which creates some really weird bump steer characteristics. There also is the weight of the whole thing to consider too. I'd go coil over in my F cars if I still had them. But I think i'd be inclined to make my own. $5-6k for a suspension system just seems crazy expensive to me.
|
|
|
|
|