Early Mustang Suspension

[cantvalve16]

If any of you have ever dealt with early Mustang suspension, you know that there is an upper and lower control arm and that there is a strut rod (to prevent fore and aft movement of the lower control arm?).

My question is:
Is there any reason why a lower control arm with 2 points mounting on the frame could not replace the lower control arm with only 1 mounting point to the frame and eliminate the the strut rod in the process?

[CDMBill]

No.

[Scott Liggett]

If any of you have ever dealt with early Mustang suspension, you know that there is an upper and lower control arm and that there is a strut rod (to prevent fore and aft movement of the lower control arm?).

My question is:
Is there any reason why a lower control arm with 2 points mounting on the frame could not replace the lower control arm with only 1 mounting point to the frame and eliminate the the strut rod in the process?

Ridetech makes one for the 65-70 impalas. CPP makes one for the box novas. I am sure someone makes one for a mustang.

[cantvalve16]

One of my circle track customers has a discount table that has 3 pairs of triangular a arms sitting on it. There are 3 different widths. They are complete a arm assemblies and they want $10 an arm. Clearance sale.

I am thinking about snagging a pair of them to use, but since the early Mustangs use a single mounting point lower arm, I would have to fab up a mount for the 2 point mount.

Does anyone have a line on any good websites for a-arm suspension geometry?

What is the ideal relationship between the arms and the ground? I have heard before that for ideal handling, the lower arm should be near paralell with the ground. Correct?

[fast Ed]

You would need to have caster adjustment in there somewhere, that is one function of the strut rod. Other than that, I don't see why not.


cheers
Ed

[Loren]

The structure of the Mustang chassis is not made for that-type control arm...one advantage of the strut-rod setup is that it directs loads into the corners where there is already strength and the chassis can be made lighter. If you want to switch to the Mustang II type, you'd need to use a crossmember that was built for it.

[milner351]

When I put the Mustang 2 cross member in the falcon, I used tubular lower control arms and no strut rods. That's the typical "street rod" set up for the M2 conversion. The lower control arm is considerably wider at the pivot than the cross member, a sleeve and gusset came with the kit to be welded to the cross member.

[Scott Liggett]

Here's the pic of the Ridetech front end setup. You can see this package comes with triangulated lower A arms that still have the caster adjustment.

http://www.ridetech.com/store/tru-turn-package-1964-1966-ford-mustang.html

[milner351]

Man that ride tech stuff looks nice, probably $2k well spent if you want a bolt in set up and don't want to loose the shock towers.

[Scott Liggett]

They have complete front and rear setups in three different stages using airbags or coil overs. I think you can buy the pieces individually.

[JeffMcKC]

I have a 2X3 Front frame rail set up with Pinto type susp on it, very nice close to this picture. I will be parting with at any time if your wanting to make a change.

[BOOOGHAR]

jason childress who owns classic mustang in st louis mo can answer those questions for you, he pounds the living buhjeebus out of his 66 stang and has been known to post on here from time to time

[BOOOGHAR]

I have a 2X3 Front frame rail set up with Pinto type susp on it, very nice close to this picture. I will be parting with at any time if your wanting to make a change.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]18133[/ATTACH]

is that what you're using on your malibu now ?

[JeffMcKC]

Malibu is a Stock susp car. This is off my Old Pro Street 66 Nova unfinished. I am putting it back to a stock susp car I have 3 Nova's to make 1.

[BOOOGHAR]

ah, ok, so its one of the bolt in kits ?