royce777

iTrader: (29)

use LNF sway bar end links

jdbaugh1

iTrader: (1)

The sway bar is fixed to the front sub-frame. The mounting point on the strut assembly moves further up and away from the sub-frame with more spring compression or if the springs are shorter or just more compressed for the same load like we have here. The upper mounting point for the end link is fixed relative to the "lower bowl where the spring rests" so if the distance between the upper strut tower and the lower bowl is decreased the distance from the mounting point to the sway bar, which is fixed to the sub-frame, is increased.

Now as far as making the front stiffer that makes sense with what I am trying to say although stiffer isn't necessarily "better" if you have the right sway bar in the first place. By rotating the sway bar so far out of it's stock position you are effectively changing the leverage of the end link on the bar which will put more load on the bushings and less torsional load on the bar.

06pursuitgtsedan

Which exactly are 250mm ones ?

royce777

iTrader: (29)

the sway bar swivels. disconnect both end links and you can swing it further away or closer to the mounting point on the strut.

jdbaugh1

iTrader: (1)

Which is exactly the reason it is even possible to use the wrong length end link with the sway bar. You are misunderstanding what I am trying to say.

royce777

iTrader: (29)

Yes I am misunderstanding. He is using FE5 Struts and lowering springs. Correct?

If so, talking in basic terms, the FE5 cars come from the factory lower than FE3&FE1 cars and use a shorter end link. Why would he want to use a longer end link when he is lowering his car?

royce777

iTrader: (29)

Yes. I am on FE5 Struts SSC springs and MOOG 9.86" end links.

Part # MOOG K750428

06pursuitgtsedan

Soo use the 9.86" type ones with my set-up and yes 08+ fe5 struts not the 05-07 s/c ones tho if makes difference but the endlinks on my pursuit gt are moogs im sure but they were put on by last owner that put spring on the fe3 struts i just took off and replaced with 08+ fe5's but the ones on my car the grease on ends guessing leaked out or they do that with greease you put into them ? there also kinda old soo gonna replace them..... but so instead of 11.80" ones my car should use i should use 9.86 like you.. ?

06pursuitgtsedan

I had too search them on rockauto and they dont come back to a year of any cobalt lol ? but they show and say this...

Also.... just noticing in a discretion thing for them says for just 2009-2010 cobalt and 2006-2010 HHR ?

MOOG K750428 {#20784687} Problem Solver; Greaseable; Length: 9.86" Info
Category: Stabilizer Bar Link

jdbaugh1

iTrader: (1)

Mock stock configuration

Same assembly with 3" lower spring

jdbaugh1

iTrader: (1)

jdbaugh1

iTrader: (1)

Now I know this isn't exactly the same dimensions as we are dealing with on the Cobalt but there is no need to go into that much detail to demonstrate the concept of what happens in each scenario.

chevygirl2006

YEs get the shorter ones. Got mine from rock auto as well.

umrdyldo

iTrader: (1)

Length doesnt matter that much. Get the LE5 end links and be done with this thread.

jdbaugh1

iTrader: (1)

No one can come up with a logical reason of why shorter end links make any sense with a lower ride height and the same sway bar. I guess if changing the sway bar geometry even further from the stock configuration is your goal then yes get the shorter end links. Personally I like to make less coin flip decisions and like to have solid logical reasoning for making any changes even if it is flawed. All I wanted was for someone tell me the logic behind suggesting shorter end links because it makes absolutely no sense to me. I demonstrated the logic behind my reasoning and so far no one has found that I got anything wrong.

royce777

iTrader: (29)

you must be a engineer or something, they always try to get all logical without just going out and testing something. there have been many people over the years who have had great results with fe5 struts, lowering springs, and shorter end links.

switch out your fe3 for fe5 endlinks and do a autocross event and let us know if you can sense a difference

umrdyldo

iTrader: (1)

I think your pictures are incorrect and it's confusing you. For one, even with lowering springs, that doesn't necessarily mean the spring itself is shorter. It could just mean they compress more under load, which is not an issue when installing the end link as the spring is mostly unloaded.

Secondly, I don't remember the sway bar being able to move up or down like in your picture. I thought it was bolted to the subframe. Also, isn't the tie rod in the way as well?

But again, Just get the FE5 end links and stop worrying about it. With lowering springs you already need an alignment. So any geometry that is different will be fixed with an alignment and you won't be able to tell much difference between different end link lengths anyway.

Oh and Royce, don't lump all us engineers in with this guy.

royce777

iTrader: (29)

I'm not! while I do understand trying to do research like that if it was something new or it cost a lot but its neither. they are like $40 end links and there has been hundreds of ppl who have ran this setup before

jdbaugh1

iTrader: (1)

I made the spring section shorter which would be equivalent to a more compressed spring. The important difference is the ride height in which case a more compressed spring and shorter spring would yield the same result. The sway bar isn't moving up and down in my graphic, it is pivoting in it's bushing just like the sway bar on our cars. I just made the arm straight instead of going to the work of putting a curve in it. However that doesn't change the concept I am trying to demonstrate. And the tie rod, control arm, and axle pivot up with the lower strut assembly so if they clear when you install them they will clear no matter how low your ride height gets.

jdbaugh1

iTrader: (1)

I'm running FE5 endlinks because I installed the 24mm sway bar from the TC Cobalt. But I ran the FE1 end links when I had just the FE5 struts and YYZ springs with FE1 sway bar which would be similar to the situation OP is in.

Just because people have been putting in the wrong end link for years doesn't make it the right configuration. Hot rodders throughout the years have done all sorts of silly **** from misunderstood concepts. It's why there are still many people today that think you need exhaust back pressure or you will lose power. But whatever, it's not that important. I just think you guys's advice is misguided. And if you guys are right and I made a mistake with my concept I want to understand. I'm fine with being wrong I just want to understand why.

umrdyldo

iTrader: (1)

I do find it interesting that you are telling us that we are in the wrong because we haven't put in the testing time, but neither have you. You have cute drawings, but no real world measurements or real driving experience between the two.

Again, this whole discussion is moot because honestly I don't think Tom Dick or Harry will tell the difference in the long run. The reason most of us switch end links is to get rid of the damn stock ones and move to a better product. I still don't think you are giving up any handling between the two. Most of the handling will still be done by the struts and sway bar.

jdbaugh1

iTrader: (1)

I didn't say you were wrong, I said that is the wrong end link assuming that GM got it right with the stock configuration. The part I think is wrong is that lowering springs should be paired with a shorter end links. My pictures are to demonstrate why that doesn't make any sense. And I make no claims about the handling which should only get better if GM's original geometry was not optimized or if the construction of the longer link is inferior for some reason.

My point was that with lowering springs you pivot the sway bar up from where it was at the stock ride height. Then if you throw on shorter end links you pivot the sway bar up even further from where it was with lowering springs but stock end links. If the shorter end links are to compensate for the change in geometry from the shorter ride height then that doesn't make sense because it just makes the deviation from stock configuration even more severe. It could be possible that the shorter end links could work better because they are stiffer or something like that but it has absolutely nothing to do with lowering the car. If that is the case people should be using FE5 links because they are more rigid and not because they are on lowering springs. Also if that is the case I don't know why GM would install the longer end links in the first place.

Clifton

I just had Primechoice strut assemblies and rear shocks done on my 2010 LT coupe along with 11" Moog problem solver endlinks. Though firm and leveled (few inch gap all around hahaha), she turns better.

Clifton

After primechoice suspension installed. FE1 rear springs remain. Eh Ive warmed up to it.

Henry3959

+1