FatMan Wonderbar Rear Suspension

Greetings!

Has anyone had any experience with the FatMan "Wonderbar" rear suspension for '65-'70 Mustangs? Anyone seen one close-up? I'm considering a lot of different options for the rear suspension on my '68 Cougar project.

The page of their catalog with the product is here:

http://www.fatmanfab.com/06page20.htm

I can't tell, but it looks like the tops of the coil-overs angle up and connect into the stock shock absorber pockets. Am I correct? If so, is this portion of the rear subframe strong enough to handle those types of loads?

I guess theoretically with the stock rear leafs, if you were running firm enough shocks, this area would see some pretty high instantaneous loads, so perhaps it's already strong enough to support the weight of the car.

Thanks in advance!

As the Moderator of this area......I would like to

WELCOME YOU HERE.....

I have not this NEW set up....
It should be very interesting to see the reception it gets.....

DEUCE......

WELCOME

Mustang and Fords Magazine, Oct. 2005 issue, p. 64 just did a write up about it. Not as comprehensive as I would have liked.

Rumors of the 70s-80s about Mustangs with air shocks to raise them sky high say that the upper shock mount area cracks badly... Ford didn't design it to carry any weight. I would think that area should be strengthened significantly over a fairly large area to use coil overs.

In principle it is great. Not all that much different than what I have done since the 60s. Basicly the trailing arms are semi-flexible ladder bars that act as locators, lift bars, and anti-roll bar (sway bar). I have a 63 Fairlane 5.0 HO fuelie T-5 with my set up on it, and I think it is great.

I am not crazy about the front strut idea though. If I were going to get rid of the stock front suspension I would go MII and ditch the shock towers.

x


www.readershotrods.com drag cars/georges

Thanks to both of you for the warm welcome! I've been lurking around the forums for quite a while on and off, and by far, the HotRodders forums are frequented by the most friendly, most helpful people.

Xntrik, I missed out on the Oct 05 issue. From the photos they show, does it look to you like those coilovers are going up into the stock upper shock mount locations? If that's the case, maybe the longevity would be a bit dubious.

Thanks!

to my knowlege no shock mount would be designed strong enough to carry the load. shocks dont carry load. only restrict movement.

Yes to Mega
I agree to Shine

It is touted as being "bolt in".... neither their ads nor the write up on Fat's personal car mentions strengthening......

If there is, it must be "bolt in".

Mega. Why are you looking for a different suspension? what's your goal?

I can show you an inexpensive way to accomplish the same result. It works. Been doing it 40 years and I didn't invent the idea.

In general, I'm looking to update the handling all around and (of course) to have something just a little unique. So, far I have the following either complete or in progress (all custom-built, not purchased):

- Custom tubular a-arms
- tubular strut rods
- Coil over conversion
- 13" disk brakes for the front
- 11" disk brakes for the rear
- Rack and Pinion conversion

Now I'm turning my attention to handling of the rear. I've started initial construction on a satchell link setup, but I'm always open to ideas or changes in strategy along the way, including starting over with a new design. Packaging is the biggest challenge in the rear of these cars, so I was intrigued by the FatMan design.

Since this is my recreation (nothing's more relaxing at the end of a day than fabricating something out of steel), the result doesn't even have to be superior to the original. As long as it was a learning experience, it's safe, and it's different, I'm happy!

I'd definitely be interested in seeing how you implemented a design similar to the FatMan design. I have a few ideas off the top of my head...

Ok,
What do you think of semi-rigid trailing arm with a quarter-eliptic suspension with an integral locating link?