Close



Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 74

Thread: Mach1 wheels

  1. #26

    Default

    The kinematic geometry of all Ford 1994-2004 FCAs is identical. By this I mean the relationship between the balljoint, inner pivots and swaybar endlink holes.

    The shape of the 1999-2004 FCAs is different to allow more tire clearance on the back side for improved turning radius. The shape of the control arm is different from the 1994-1998 model, but the geometry of the FCA in the way that we care about is identical.

    I don't know where Trey got the 0.75" measurement. Mine is from measuring the actual arms with a CMM plus confirmation with Ford drawings of them.
    Jack Hidley
    Maximum Motorsports Tech Support

  2. #27
    FEP Super Member PaceFever79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Western PA
    Posts
    9,618

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wraithracing View Post
    Here is the only picture I have of my PC right now. This is several years old, but the wheel/tire setup is still the same. Also keep in mind that I have 03/04 Cobra brakes front and rear as well as the Cobra IRS in the back. I am running a 17x9 with 24mm offset up front and a 17x9 with 36mm offset in the back due to the wider IRS track width.



    Trey
    Can't let that pass without saying, nice!

  3. #28
    Moderator wraithracing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Grand Junction, CO/RR TX
    Posts
    14,209

    Default

    I am pretty sure mine was a brain fart! Sorry for that! I was posting too early in the morning and the coffee hadn't kicked it.

    The 3/4" number comes from a long standing confusion on the difference. I believe it started with Mathis' book back in the 90's and continued from there. I am sure Jack's numbers are more accurate, although I have also seen 1.22 as a measurement too. Not a huge difference, but Jack and MM deal with stuff more often than the rest of us.

    The .120 and 1/8" are just rounding differences, depending on what or how you are measuring the vehicle. Many don't use decimals and the 1/8" was my attempt to make it easier.

    My understanding is the only difference between the 99-04 arms and the 94-98 arms is that the 99-04 arms were reshaped for more wheel clearance. I also believe the 03/04 Cobra front lowers use unique bushings compared to the non Cobra's. Otherwise the overall length is the same.

    Hope that clears things up. I also didn't see that Jack had already posted. Trying to do too many things at once again!

    Trey
    Last edited by wraithracing; 02-16-2016 at 09:12 PM. Reason: Additional Information
    ​Trey

    "I Don't build it hoping for your approval! I built it because it meets mine!"

    "I've spent most of my money on Mustangs, racing, and women... the rest I just wasted."

    Mustangs Past: Too many to remember!
    Current Mustangs:
    1969 Mach 1
    1979 Pace Car now 5.0/5 speed
    1982 GT Stalled RestoModification
    1984 SVO Still Waiting Restoration
    1986 GT Under going Wide Body Conversion Currently

    Current Capris:
    1981 Capri Roller
    1981 Capri Black Magic Roller Basket Case
    1982 Capri RS 5.0/4spd T-top Full Restoration Stalled in TX
    1984 Capri RS T-top Roller
    1983-84 Gloy Racing Trans Am/IMSA Body Parts

  4. #29
    Moderator wraithracing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Grand Junction, CO/RR TX
    Posts
    14,209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PaceFever79 View Post
    Can't let that pass without saying, nice!
    Thanks! I will say it no longer has the Aero glass either! SVO sails and original glass so that looks better! Now it just needs a new motor!

    Trey
    ​Trey

    "I Don't build it hoping for your approval! I built it because it meets mine!"

    "I've spent most of my money on Mustangs, racing, and women... the rest I just wasted."

    Mustangs Past: Too many to remember!
    Current Mustangs:
    1969 Mach 1
    1979 Pace Car now 5.0/5 speed
    1982 GT Stalled RestoModification
    1984 SVO Still Waiting Restoration
    1986 GT Under going Wide Body Conversion Currently

    Current Capris:
    1981 Capri Roller
    1981 Capri Black Magic Roller Basket Case
    1982 Capri RS 5.0/4spd T-top Full Restoration Stalled in TX
    1984 Capri RS T-top Roller
    1983-84 Gloy Racing Trans Am/IMSA Body Parts

  5. #30

    Default

    To explain a little further.

    The SN95 FCAs are 1.23" wider than Fox FCAs. That does not affect the lateral position of the wheel 1.23". It would do this if the pivot axis of the FCA was parallel to the centerline of the car, but it isn't. The FCA pivot axis is at a 7.5 degree angle to the centerline of the car. This requires a correction factor of 0.962. 1.18" = 0.962 * 1.23".

    On the subject of believing everything you read in books. The text below was posted by William Mathis on cc.com about his experience in the publishing of the Mustang Handbooks.


    I appreciate the posts to this thread. I wish I could provide each of you with a copy of the original manuscripts. However, the publisher has copyright until they decide to release it. When I wrote the books, DOS 6.0 was the latest PC system and there were no ZIP drives to store the data. Unfortunately, my computer, with the original 300,000 word manuscripts, 3000+ pictures and several hundred CAD drawings were lost when my house was burglarized. At this time the only originals are in the hands of the publisher.

    I have watched these forums for years without participation. Even when topics were discussed that affected me, I have remained silent. However, I would like to clarify a few things. When I wrote the Mustang Performance Handbooks, I foolishly thought that what I wrote would actually make it to print. Ten years ago, when I wrote those books, I was unaware that HPBooks had a publishing restriction on the size of the book that could be published. At that time, Price, Stern and Sloan (then publishers of HPBooks) required that all their “how-to” books could not be physically thicker than would permit 3 books to fit in a standard bookrack with ease of insertion and removal. Most bookracks then and now are typically limited to approximately 1.5 inches in depth. You may have noticed this in places like Lowes where the do-it-yourself books are displayed. In my case, what this meant was that my manuscripts were hacked to meet this criteria. Unfortunately, this resulted in publications that barely resembled what I had written. Some of the sections, particularly in the second book (this was actually published as the first book on powertrains), were so modified that the sections were confusing at best, and blatantly wrong at worst. Most of the chassis drawings, including the double-wishbone suspension and tubular crossmembers, were not even included in the book. Actually, I am still puzzled why they chose the drawings they included. I submitted all my drawings in AutoCAD format only to be told they were “too complex” for the eight-grade reader they assumed their market was. To make matters worst, the publisher did not have the ability to read AutoCAD drawings into their print system; so each drawing was run through some sort of graphic program for conversion. The results were drawings that had strange tolerances and looks. This was most evident in the weight and balance drawing in the back of the chassis book where the formulas were improperly converted leaving half the variables out. When I received the published copies, I was livid and demanded the books be withdrawn and corrected. However, I was informed that the contract I had signed gave them final editorial control and basically I should F.O. For those of you that have relied on some of this misinformation I apologize to you and thank for purchasing the books in spite of it.

    William R. Mathis
    Graduate Mechanical Engineer
    Jack Hidley
    Maximum Motorsports Tech Support

  6. #31
    Moderator wraithracing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Grand Junction, CO/RR TX
    Posts
    14,209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hidley View Post
    On the subject of believing everything you read in books. The text below was posted by William Mathis on cc.com about his experience in the publishing of the Mustang Handbooks.
    I completely agree with you on that! I wasn't trying to throw Mathis under the bus. I remember either that posting or another one similar where he explained that A LOT of his numbers, calculations, etc. had been screwed up by the publisher and misinformation was rampant. This was exaggerated by the fact that his two books were in many cases the "Bible" that many of us grew up on and learned from when modifying our Foxes for more performance, racing, etc. I personally still have both of his books with their worn covers, the bookmarked pages, and even a few scribbles here and there.

    Unfortunately many of those inaccuracies have gone on to internet folklore and continue to this day. Unfortunately I attempted to perpetuate one by my own posting. So sorry for the misinformation and Jack thanks for the clarification on the control arm numbers.

    Trey
    ​Trey

    "I Don't build it hoping for your approval! I built it because it meets mine!"

    "I've spent most of my money on Mustangs, racing, and women... the rest I just wasted."

    Mustangs Past: Too many to remember!
    Current Mustangs:
    1969 Mach 1
    1979 Pace Car now 5.0/5 speed
    1982 GT Stalled RestoModification
    1984 SVO Still Waiting Restoration
    1986 GT Under going Wide Body Conversion Currently

    Current Capris:
    1981 Capri Roller
    1981 Capri Black Magic Roller Basket Case
    1982 Capri RS 5.0/4spd T-top Full Restoration Stalled in TX
    1984 Capri RS T-top Roller
    1983-84 Gloy Racing Trans Am/IMSA Body Parts

  7. #32

    Default

    On the subject of believing everything you read in books. The text below was posted by William Mathis on cc.com about his experience in the publishing of the Mustang Handbooks.[/QUOTE]


    Gotta love corp. America and all their lawyers, they put up bill boards and give interviews about how much the care about the cust/consumer.....when they really don't give a F@#k about us!!!!! only care about what they can manipulate the numbers to look like for the quarterly stock holder report

  8. #33

    Default

    This is my experience. Keeping in mind that I only have like 4 posts now but I lost my membership due to inactivity. I have actually posted quite a bit here. Im getting ready to get my 86 back on the road, but here it goes.

    The Mach 1 Wheels will NOT work with the SVO 5 Lug hubbed rotor setup. I tried and found out the hard way. Hubbed rotors interfere with the hole in the bullets and do not allow the rim mounting surface to make contact with the rim mounting surface on the rotor. I went to a SN-95 front end swap with (ranger axles and drums) on the rear.

    My 86 GT needed some clearance on the Flowmasters 2.5 inch 3 chamber cat back exhaust as well as some body minor clearance in the inside wheel well. No big deal that a BFH couldn't fix. There were no rear outer wheel well issues and no issues with the front. I had 245-45/17 tires all the way around.
    I had 5.72 inch (I think) backspace 2000 Bullet GT ford take offs 17x8.

    I later went to a cobra brake setup front and rear and had no issues front or rear even though the rear tires are now .9 inches further out. It’s close to the outer wheel well but I haven’t had any issues. I never even had to roll the outer wheel well lip.

    My chassis has always been FMS “C” sport lowering springs, KYB shocks and Struts, Stock front control arms, BBK rear control arms, 1” 3/8 front bar and a PST .75” bar in the rear with the stock rear sway bar. When its time for new tires I will be running 245-40/17's the 45's are just a little big.

    Yancy
    shagmail

  9. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shagmail View Post
    This is my experience. Keeping in mind that I only have like 4 posts now but I lost my membership due to inactivity. I have actually posted quite a bit here. Im getting ready to get my 86 back on the road, but here it goes.

    The Mach 1 Wheels will NOT work with the SVO 5 Lug hubbed rotor setup. I tried and found out the hard way. Hubbed rotors interfere with the hole in the bullets and do not allow the rim mounting surface to make contact with the rim mounting surface on the rotor. I went to a SN-95 front end swap with (ranger axles and drums) on the rear.

    My 86 GT needed some clearance on the Flowmasters 2.5 inch 3 chamber cat back exhaust as well as some body minor clearance in the inside wheel well. No big deal that a BFH couldn't fix. There were no rear outer wheel well issues and no issues with the front. I had 245-45/17 tires all the way around.
    I had 5.72 inch (I think) backspace 2000 Bullet GT ford take offs 17x8.

    I later went to a cobra brake setup front and rear and had no issues front or rear even though the rear tires are now .9 inches further out. It’s close to the outer wheel well but I haven’t had any issues. I never even had to roll the outer wheel well lip.

    My chassis has always been FMS “C” sport lowering springs, KYB shocks and Struts, Stock front control arms, BBK rear control arms, 1” 3/8 front bar and a PST .75” bar in the rear with the stock rear sway bar. When its time for new tires I will be running 245-40/17's the 45's are just a little big.

    Yancy
    shagmail

    THX for your response!!!!!!! great info

    to recap what you are saying you used
    2000 Factory 17x8 mach1 wheels 5.72bs
    stock 86' kmember
    SN95 spindles....what year?
    SN95 Lowers......what year?
    Cobra rotors and calipers front
    SN95 cobra rear end with cobra cobra rotors and calipers....what year?
    245-40/17.....are the 245-45/17 to wide, tall or what IYO?

    sounds actually what all my math tells me will fit the best. I have been most concerned with the front and where the outside edge of tire/wheel will be at in relation to the fender opening. Would love to see some pics....thx for getting a new acct.!!!!

  10. #35
    Moderator wraithracing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Grand Junction, CO/RR TX
    Posts
    14,209

    Default

    If using the stock K member you only want to use the 94/95 spindles as the 96-04 spindles will cause major bumpsteer that you will not be able to correct completely even with a bumpsteer kit.

    If you use an aftermarket K member such as MM unit then the 96-04 spindles are the better choice.

    Also FYI the 94-98 Cobra rear ends are solid axles. The 99-04 Cobra rear ends are all IRS.

    Trey
    ​Trey

    "I Don't build it hoping for your approval! I built it because it meets mine!"

    "I've spent most of my money on Mustangs, racing, and women... the rest I just wasted."

    Mustangs Past: Too many to remember!
    Current Mustangs:
    1969 Mach 1
    1979 Pace Car now 5.0/5 speed
    1982 GT Stalled RestoModification
    1984 SVO Still Waiting Restoration
    1986 GT Under going Wide Body Conversion Currently

    Current Capris:
    1981 Capri Roller
    1981 Capri Black Magic Roller Basket Case
    1982 Capri RS 5.0/4spd T-top Full Restoration Stalled in TX
    1984 Capri RS T-top Roller
    1983-84 Gloy Racing Trans Am/IMSA Body Parts

  11. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wraithracing View Post
    If using the stock K member you only want to use the 94/95 spindles as the 96-04 spindles will cause major bumpsteer that you will not be able to correct completely even with a bumpsteer kit.

    If you use an aftermarket K member such as MM unit then the 96-04 spindles are the better choice.

    Also FYI the 94-98 Cobra rear ends are solid axles. The 99-04 Cobra rear ends are all IRS.

    Trey

    thx Trey, exact reasons why I ask asking Shag the years....just to make sure he used the same parts I am planning. Found some factory 17x8 Machs with 245/45/17 already mounted on CL. Made deal with the guy he is delivering them tomorrow. I already have the Cobra rear end, just need to reassemble it, need to locate me some 94/95 spindles and some 94-98 lowers (or from what I understood Jack is saying that 94-04 lowers are the same they just look different so I guess they are on option also?). I will also need to purchase front Cobra rotors and calipers.

    Are 86' 4cyl and 8cyl kmembers the same? Just making sure since my red 86" is an original 4cyl car, I assume they are the same. Have only read where SVO's differ.
    Last edited by jazdill; 02-17-2016 at 08:32 PM.

  12. #37
    Moderator wraithracing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Grand Junction, CO/RR TX
    Posts
    14,209

    Default

    Yes, the 94-04 longer control arms are interchangeable with the 99-04 arms giving you a bit more turning radius without rubbing issues.

    The 1986 K member is the same for both the 4 cyl and the V8. The SVO K is unique.

    Best of Luck!

    Trey
    ​Trey

    "I Don't build it hoping for your approval! I built it because it meets mine!"

    "I've spent most of my money on Mustangs, racing, and women... the rest I just wasted."

    Mustangs Past: Too many to remember!
    Current Mustangs:
    1969 Mach 1
    1979 Pace Car now 5.0/5 speed
    1982 GT Stalled RestoModification
    1984 SVO Still Waiting Restoration
    1986 GT Under going Wide Body Conversion Currently

    Current Capris:
    1981 Capri Roller
    1981 Capri Black Magic Roller Basket Case
    1982 Capri RS 5.0/4spd T-top Full Restoration Stalled in TX
    1984 Capri RS T-top Roller
    1983-84 Gloy Racing Trans Am/IMSA Body Parts

  13. #38

    Default

    2000 Factory 17x8 mach1 wheels 5.72bs Yes
    stock 86' kmember Yes
    SN95 spindles....what year? 94/95 sourced from MPS Salvage in Georgia
    SN95 Lowers......what year? I Initially used Stock 86 Front Lower Control Arms then Went to the Ford Motor Sports ones that are not available any more. Basically stock part for standard fox body but with a low friction Fox Body lower Ball joint I think they were M-3075-A. I had to use the spacer that came in the kit for the cobra brake upgrade for the fox from ford M-2300. My friend upgraded his 93 to cobra brakes and I called Ford Motorsports to get the dimensions for the front ball joint shim and they just sent me 2 new ones.


    Cobra rotors and calipers front Yes Cobra Rotors
    SN95 cobra rear end with cobra cobra rotors and calipers....what year? I got a 10th anniversary red caliper kit on the internet, E-Bay. It was a ford dealership doing internet sales out of Virginia . So 2003 but any would work I think 94 up to like 2003. And Stock cobra rotors. I'm told that the non cobra are the same size but the cobra rear rotors are finned for heat dissipation and have smaller pads because of that. (I can't confirm they are the same but I can confirm that they are or were finned like the front and had smaller or thinner pads with less Brake pad material on them than the same non-cobra) And that the rear calipers were supposed to be the same Cobra/non-cobra (again this i don't know for sure)


    245-40/17.....are the 245-45/17 to wide, tall or what IYO?

    The tires in my opinion were too tall due to the 45 aspect ratio. I did my mustang to SN-95 before I my friend did his cobra conversion. I shared my slight displeasure with the 45 and told him to get 40 aspect ratio tires and his was great. Now there were some differences in wheel well openings I THINK!! Maybe not but I have read and have been told by in the know people / businesses that the early foxes had slightly smaller wheel well opening. My wheel issue showed that slightly maybe. I wrecked my mustang nearly 12 years ago and am just now getting ready to get it back on the road and it will need tires. When it gets tires I will put 245-40/17 on at the very least the front. I once saw a 83GT with 5 lug SN-95 on the front with ranger 5 lug drums with FMS springs with 2445-40/17 on the front and 275-40/17 on the rear with no rolling of the fender lip of massaging of anything with no issues. BUT I CANNOT CONFIRM THAT THIS IS THE CASE. I will eventually try but till then i am only recommending the 245-40 on the rear if you keep an eye on your specific application addressing things that come up for you. But I think that it will work.


    After doing my friends cobra upgrade I used his instructions that had part numbers and explanations of the individual parts to piece my own hodgepodge kit together with the exception of the E/Brake cables that he didn’t need for the non-93 mustangs.

    Here is something to read M-2300-k kit. It had some real good information and is actually the instructions you will need.

    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...14733917,d.dmo

    Or search for “ford racing m 2300 k cobra brake kit ”

  14. #39

    Default

    Trey is correct about the spindles and control arms but I kept things simple. I also relied heavily on MPS salvage in Georgia. I pretty much knew what I was doing BUT when I went astray MPS (MPS stands for Mustang Parts Specialties) kept me on point and I bought a lot of stuff from them.

  15. #40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shagmail View Post
    2000 Factory 17x8 mach1 wheels 5.72bs Yes
    stock 86' kmember Yes
    SN95 spindles....what year? 94/95 sourced from MPS Salvage in Georgia
    SN95 Lowers......what year? I Initially used Stock 86 Front Lower Control Arms then Went to the Ford Motor Sports ones that are not available any more. Basically stock part for standard fox body but with a low friction Fox Body lower Ball joint I think they were M-3075-A. I had to use the spacer that came in the kit for the cobra brake upgrade for the fox from ford M-2300. My friend upgraded his 93 to cobra brakes and I called Ford Motorsports to get the dimensions for the front ball joint shim and they just sent me 2 new ones.
    if you are using fox style lowers that would mean you are 1.18" per side narrower than I am planning to be by using 99-04 lowers. did you have to run a spacer to help with inside clearance? in your opinion will the additional 1.18" put the front tire/wheel clearance to wide in relation to my fender opening? do you have any pics of your set up that the front wheel inset distance is visible?

    Got my Machs setting in the garage tonight. plan on reassembling rear end, installing it this weekend and of coarse getting rear wheels mounted. I thought I had front figured out by using 99-04 lowers but now I am questioning the use of them since you used fox lowers. need to get it figured out so I can complete the front next weekend.

  16. #41
    Moderator wraithracing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Grand Junction, CO/RR TX
    Posts
    14,209

    Default

    Spacers are generally not needed when running the SN95 spindles or even the 87-93 V8 spindles. The 79-86 and 87-93 NON V8 spindles are the ones that normally need a spacer for strut clearance due to the offsets that are setup for the 87-93 cars.

    The 17X8 up front with the 30mm offset should work fine, although you will be tight to the fender lip. Your tire size, brand. alignment, etc will all affect you clearances. I would recommend installing everything and see how it works as that is the only way you will know for sure. If you don't like the overall look or fit, then you swap out for the 79-93 lower control arms and you will be fine.

    I have a set of 17X8 on my SVO and there are no issues, but I don't currently have any Foxes with the SN95 front lower control arms, except maybe my 82 GT. I will have to check that again as I don't remember what is currently installed.

    Good Luck!

    Trey
    ​Trey

    "I Don't build it hoping for your approval! I built it because it meets mine!"

    "I've spent most of my money on Mustangs, racing, and women... the rest I just wasted."

    Mustangs Past: Too many to remember!
    Current Mustangs:
    1969 Mach 1
    1979 Pace Car now 5.0/5 speed
    1982 GT Stalled RestoModification
    1984 SVO Still Waiting Restoration
    1986 GT Under going Wide Body Conversion Currently

    Current Capris:
    1981 Capri Roller
    1981 Capri Black Magic Roller Basket Case
    1982 Capri RS 5.0/4spd T-top Full Restoration Stalled in TX
    1984 Capri RS T-top Roller
    1983-84 Gloy Racing Trans Am/IMSA Body Parts

  17. #42

    Default

    I did not use a wheel spacer. The spacer I was referring to was the spacer required when Using the SN-95 Spindle on the Stock Fox Control arm/Ball joint. You will see the difference. Look at the instructions for the M-2300-K cobra kit I pasted the link to in my previous post. Front instructions Step 20. If you look at the parts list there is actually a part number for the spacers.

    Sadly I don't have any pictures. In fact I wrecked my cay in 2004 and its been at my friends house "almost done" since early 2005. I used to be prety active here but its been since like 2006 since I logged in and I lost my profile and post count.


    I like wrenching on stuff so much if you were close I would come over and help you do it.

    Shag

  18. #43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shagmail View Post
    I did not use a wheel spacer. The spacer I was referring to was the spacer required when Using the SN-95 Spindle on the Stock Fox Control arm/Ball joint. You will see the difference. Look at the instructions for the M-2300-K cobra kit I pasted the link to in my previous post. Front instructions Step 20. If you look at the parts list there is actually a part number for the spacers.

    Sadly I don't have any pictures. In fact I wrecked my cay in 2004 and its been at my friends house "almost done" since early 2005. I used to be prety active here but its been since like 2006 since I logged in and I lost my profile and post count.


    I like wrenching on stuff so much if you were close I would come over and help you do it.

    Shag

    thx for posting M-2300-K instructions, I had never seen those before. while I am aware of the spacer issues with the fox lowers and sn95 spindles. the reason I asked about the wheel spacers was I was thinking the +30mm offset wheel clearance might cause trbl with having the fox lowers since the track width would be 1.18" narrower than the sn95 lowers. Shag in your opinion if I used the sn95 lowers with the additional 1.18"/side more than your set up with fox lowers has, will I be to close to my wheel opening? I want it to look as would the factory would have made it look. it seems as while everyone keeps suggesting to use the sn95 lowers with these 17x8 +30mm offset wheels, I have yet to find a actual set up where some one has done this. im starting to lean more towards using the fox lowers on the car first, then deciding from there if I want to try the sn95 lowers.

    thx for the offer of helping!!! I bet there is not very many from Arkansas here on the foureyed tho
    Last edited by jazdill; 02-19-2016 at 11:30 PM.

  19. #44

    Default

    In an effort to speed things up for you PM me your cell or an email address. I did find a few pictures on my sell that show the front wheel. And in an effort I will (once I get to work tomorrow I'll attempt to post them here for continuity. Also I need to reintroduce myself in the new guy section.

    In my opinion you will be making a big mistake using wider sn-95 LCA. If you move the bottom axis out without also moving the top axis of the strut you will end up with crazy bad and uncorrectable negative front wheel camber. Your tire will be leaning in at the top well beyond the normal steering settings.

    My setup gave me more negative camber than I really wanted but it was still within the settings for the car. It drove fine and cut off me it was on rails but it tended to wear out the inside of the tires. So while I remember the sn-95 LCA option there was other things that needed changed that I was not in the market to do. I if I remember the k-member needed changed but don't quote me on that.

    If you have the ability to post pictures, feel free to post them after I give them to you.

    Also, are you in Arkansas? I'm in Memphis Tennessee. We might not be that far away after all.

  20. #45

    Default

    I sent that from my cell phone so please forgive the auto correct.

  21. #46
    Moderator wraithracing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Grand Junction, CO/RR TX
    Posts
    14,209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shagmail View Post
    In my opinion you will be making a big mistake using wider sn-95 LCA. If you move the bottom axis out without also moving the top axis of the strut you will end up with crazy bad and uncorrectable negative front wheel camber. Your tire will be leaning in at the top well beyond the normal steering settings.

    My setup gave me more negative camber than I really wanted but it was still within the settings for the car. It drove fine and cut off me it was on rails but it tended to wear out the inside of the tires. So while I remember the sn-95 LCA option there was other things that needed changed that I was not in the market to do. I if I remember the k-member needed changed but don't quote me on that.
    I will have to respectfully disagree with your advise on the SN95 LCA. Adding the SN95 spindles to a Fox with the stock Fox LCA immediately causes your camber to become more positive by 1.7 Degrees with the 94/95 units and 1.3 Degrees with the 96-04 units. This is caused by the Fox LCA being shorter and pulling the bottom of the spindle in more than it normally would be with the SN95 LCA. You can correct for this with a set of CC Plates and I highly recommend them, especially the MM units.

    The SN95 LCA add all of these benefits as mentioned here on MM Website: http://www.maximummotorsports.com/te..._arm_swap.aspx


    • Increase front track width, which will increase front grip.
    • Reduce understeer because of the increase in front grip.
    • Increase cornering speed because of the increase in front grip.
    • Reduce binding in the suspension because of the inherent lower friction of the 1994-04 ball joints. This improves both handling and ride quality.
    • Will increase the amount of negative camber that can be achieved because the ball joint is moved outboard.




    Another benefit or effect of installing the longer arms is that ride height will be slight lower too. The disadvantage of the longer arms is it will limit the front wheel width generally 8", maybe an 8.5" if you are willing to modify the front fenders for additional clearance.

    Hope that helps!


    Trey
    ​Trey

    "I Don't build it hoping for your approval! I built it because it meets mine!"

    "I've spent most of my money on Mustangs, racing, and women... the rest I just wasted."

    Mustangs Past: Too many to remember!
    Current Mustangs:
    1969 Mach 1
    1979 Pace Car now 5.0/5 speed
    1982 GT Stalled RestoModification
    1984 SVO Still Waiting Restoration
    1986 GT Under going Wide Body Conversion Currently

    Current Capris:
    1981 Capri Roller
    1981 Capri Black Magic Roller Basket Case
    1982 Capri RS 5.0/4spd T-top Full Restoration Stalled in TX
    1984 Capri RS T-top Roller
    1983-84 Gloy Racing Trans Am/IMSA Body Parts

  22. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shagmail View Post
    In an effort to speed things up for you PM me your cell or an email address. I did find a few pictures on my sell that show the front wheel. And in an effort I will (once I get to work tomorrow I'll attempt to post them here for continuity. Also I need to reintroduce myself in the new guy section.

    In my opinion you will be making a big mistake using wider sn-95 LCA. If you move the bottom axis out without also moving the top axis of the strut you will end up with crazy bad and uncorrectable negative front wheel camber. Your tire will be leaning in at the top well beyond the normal steering settings.

    My setup gave me more negative camber than I really wanted but it was still within the settings for the car. It drove fine and cut off me it was on rails but it tended to wear out the inside of the tires. So while I remember the sn-95 LCA option there was other things that needed changed that I was not in the market to do. I if I remember the k-member needed changed but don't quote me on that.

    If you have the ability to post pictures, feel free to post them after I give them to you.

    Also, are you in Arkansas? I'm in Memphis Tennessee. We might not be that far away after all.
    Shag unfortunately we are 3.5hrs apart. the offer for help is very much appreciated tho!!! I will pm you my cell# would love to see the pics. Jack with MM and Trey both suggest the sn95 lowers for better geometry. while I feel both are giving solid advice and I feel like the are correct, my biggest concern is outside wheel opening clearance with the sn95 lowers. like I have said a few post back, I have yet to find an example car that has the sn95 lowers, 94/95 spindles and 17x8 +30mm offset wheels.

    Got to some of the work done prepping for the swap this afternoon. cleaned and reassembled the cobra rear end. inspected all bearings, clutches in the posi-trac, and just looked over all parts for any signs of wear. Actually ended up pretty much reusing all parts, only replacing axle and pinion seals since I had to remove them to inspect bearings. Could use new pads and rotors. I measured the thickness of rotors and they are pretty much done according to the min. spec cast in the back of the rotor they are only .025 over the min. so I do not figure the parts store guys will turn them for me. I may take them over to a friends and lathe them myself so I can install new pads. I will more than likely just run them as is for now tho. I decided to go with 3.27 gears for now until I decide what tranny I want in the car. located me some 94/95 spindles they should ship and arrive some time next week I hope. biggest decision at this point is whether to paint calipers something other than high heat black lol.

    actually the next part I have to start thinking out is the brake line issues front and rear, EB brake issues I might encounter and what brake rotors to use. naturally I would like to use cobra front rotors and calipers since I will have cobras on the rear but I have not priced the cobra fronts yet. if cost is in the ball park of the 94-98 sn95 stuff I will go cobra. if it is a lot more expensive I will just use 94-98 sn95. I would assume I would not have any issues with the smaller than cobra fronts since the calipers are the same for cobra/non-cobra on the rear. I figure the EB changes will be pretty strait forward, do not for see that being to much of an issue. as for the brake lines I plan on putting quiet a bit of thought into them. I only want to redo them once so I will take into account any future mods and plan around them as well, might decide to just run all new lines front to rear and put them where I feel like the best place is.

  23. #48
    Moderator wraithracing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Grand Junction, CO/RR TX
    Posts
    14,209

    Default

    1984 SVO stock with 17X8 30mm offset with 245/45/17

    Name:  2016-02-20 14.16.38.jpg
Views: 186
Size:  119.2 KB

    Name:  2016-02-20 14.16.19.jpg
Views: 188
Size:  138.0 KB

    Name:  2016-02-20 14.16.24.jpg
Views: 186
Size:  130.9 KB

    1982 Mustang GT stock lower control arms with SN95 spindles 17X8 30mm offset 245/45/17

    Name:  2016-02-20 14.17.48.jpg
Views: 197
Size:  113.9 KB

    1979 Mustang Pace Car stock lower control arms with SN95 spindles 17X9 24mm offset 255/40/17

    Name:  2016-02-20 14.18.20.jpg
Views: 185
Size:  104.7 KB

    Sorry I don't have a set of SN95 arms with SN95 spindles right now. I will have that set up on my 84 SVO when I get around to rebuilding it.

    Trey
    ​Trey

    "I Don't build it hoping for your approval! I built it because it meets mine!"

    "I've spent most of my money on Mustangs, racing, and women... the rest I just wasted."

    Mustangs Past: Too many to remember!
    Current Mustangs:
    1969 Mach 1
    1979 Pace Car now 5.0/5 speed
    1982 GT Stalled RestoModification
    1984 SVO Still Waiting Restoration
    1986 GT Under going Wide Body Conversion Currently

    Current Capris:
    1981 Capri Roller
    1981 Capri Black Magic Roller Basket Case
    1982 Capri RS 5.0/4spd T-top Full Restoration Stalled in TX
    1984 Capri RS T-top Roller
    1983-84 Gloy Racing Trans Am/IMSA Body Parts

  24. #49

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wraithracing View Post
    1982 Mustang GT stock lower control arms with SN95 spindles 17X8 30mm offset 245/45/17

    Name:  2016-02-20 14.17.48.jpg
Views: 197
Size:  113.9 KB



    Trey
    thx for the pics Trey. judging by your pic of the 1982 Mustang GT stock lower control arms with SN95 spindles 17X8 30mm offset 245/45/17 you posted I am quiet sure the +1.18 from the sn95 lower would push the outer clearance past wheel opening? do you plan to leave the stock kmember in your SVO when you install 94/95 spindles and sn95 lowers?

    just curious, which do you feel is wider set up, the SVO or the 82gt? mathematically the svo should be since they both have same wheel tire combo but looking at the pic both look pretty close to same.
    Last edited by jazdill; 02-20-2016 at 10:22 PM.

  25. #50
    Moderator wraithracing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Grand Junction, CO/RR TX
    Posts
    14,209

    Default

    I haven't decided yet on K member for the SVO. Originally I wanted to leave it, but I have considered going to a MM K member too. The spring choice of stock location springs or C/O will ultimately make the decision for me.

    Mathematically the SVO is a wider track than the 82 GT. As for wheel location compared to the outside of the fender they are both very similar, although I will say the GT does sit in just a bit more. It is not a great comparison as is due to the GT not having any drivetrain in it at this time, so the fender gap gives the illusion that the wheel is sitting further out than it really is.

    Unfortunately due to all of our snow melting off right now (a good thing!) and the area where the cars are stored is gravel over dirt it's a bit wet and soggy and moving the cars is not a good idea right now. Otherwise I would move the GT out and get you some better pictures to help show the difference between the two.

    Trey
    ​Trey

    "I Don't build it hoping for your approval! I built it because it meets mine!"

    "I've spent most of my money on Mustangs, racing, and women... the rest I just wasted."

    Mustangs Past: Too many to remember!
    Current Mustangs:
    1969 Mach 1
    1979 Pace Car now 5.0/5 speed
    1982 GT Stalled RestoModification
    1984 SVO Still Waiting Restoration
    1986 GT Under going Wide Body Conversion Currently

    Current Capris:
    1981 Capri Roller
    1981 Capri Black Magic Roller Basket Case
    1982 Capri RS 5.0/4spd T-top Full Restoration Stalled in TX
    1984 Capri RS T-top Roller
    1983-84 Gloy Racing Trans Am/IMSA Body Parts

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •