J, okay, so I found the lengths of the arms in the 'Custom IFS' , 7.87 uppers 13.25 lowers for a ratio of 1.68, not too shabby. My GW arms and the stock lowers give 1.73, so ratio wise, you're in the ball park. But we still have the problem of where do these arms mount, and how are they different from the M2 gear. We also know the camber gain of either design is much much less than what a tweaked stock setup can offer.
I'd like to see a still of the falcon at 1:05, at 1:54, and 2:20, and at 2:32. On The 32, what about the video at the 2011 'run to the coast' at 0:24, at 0:37, and at 0:45. I'm not seeing any obvious difference between the M2 setup and the "Custom" other than that the Custom uses more expensive coilovers.
Why doesn't the TCI setup advertise how they've done at the Super Chevy handling challenge? You guys did well in the 2009 survey, and then placed dead last in the autocross in the 2010 survey. I realize them ain't stangs out there..... ....but dang, last place ?! A 66 Nova, like the one you had in that survey, has a unit body construction and shock towers from the factory, just like our mustangs do. The guys from GW ran a convertible , which flexs more, and beat you at everything. It appears that you didn't send a car in 2011 and 2012 ? it seems to me that what this shows is that your style of front end conversion cannot achieve the same geometry and camber gain as the tower suspensions can. Now, if y'all designed taller spindles, great things might be possible. But If you have a car that originally has shock towers, the frame rails don't seem to allow placing the inner pivots low enough to get spectacular camber curves, and cornering power. It can be good, but not great. So i'll stand by my recommendation that they only be used if one is swapping in a coyote or a mod and one has to have the room.
And MMike, yes, i really will put some numbers up for you soon. I haven't forgotten you.