Close



Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 35 of 35
  1. #26

    Default

    Front swaybar widths:

    Non SVO Fox Mustang = 41.625"
    Narrow Thunderbird = 42.75"
    Wide Thunderbird = 43.75"
    Lincoln Mark VII = 44.8"
    Last edited by Jack Hidley; 09-02-2021 at 05:02 PM.
    Jack Hidley
    Maximum Motorsports Tech Support

  2. #27

    Default

    So, taking a stock 86 with a stock K, what is the actual track with change in front track width going from the OEM LCA and spindle to a 94 arm and spindle?

    We know the 94 arm is 1.3 +/- longer. We also know that the 94 spindle ball is moved closer to the bearing surface but by how much I don't know. There also may be a difference in the wheel mounting surface height from the bearing surface on the 2 spindles (86 vs 94). I have the 94 lowers CCM'd but I haven't done the 2 different spindles yet. Which I will do when I get the time. I was just wondering what to expect.

  3. #28

    Default

    The SN-95 arms, spindles fit great with S197 wheels. Can easily turn lock to lock with 245/45-17's without rubbing (255's would easily fit), no rubbing over hard bumps, etc. Drives amazing.

    Edit: Stock 86 K Member
    Attached Images Attached Images     
    Last edited by Two86fiveoh's; 09-02-2021 at 04:15 PM.
    Jeremiah

    1986 Mustang GT 5spd, 3.27's
    PimpXS ECU/Android Single DIN Touchscreen
    SN95 Cobra Brakes/SN95 Front LCA's/Axles/S197 Wheels
    1998 Explorer Engine/Stock HO Cam 281rwhp/326rwtq

  4. #29

    Default

    From post #22.

    Fox FCAs =12.79" wide.
    SN95 FCAs = 14.02" wide.

    The delta is 1.23".

    Multiply by the correction factor for the pivot axis of the FCA in plan view. 1.23" x 0.962 = 1.18"

    The exact changes for trackwidth of the different SN95 spindles is available at the link below. They include the thickness of the rotor hat in them.

    https://www.maximummotorsports.com/t...4_spindle.aspx
    Jack Hidley
    Maximum Motorsports Tech Support

  5. #30
    FEP Power Member gmatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Chicago, south subs
    Posts
    2,136

    Default

    Just to muddy the water; what about swapping in an entire 94-95 front suspension, k member, steering rack, control arms spindles/brakes, all of it?

  6. #31

    Default

    The only change to the trackwidth that makes is due to the k-member width. This is not super easy to compare because the toe angle of the different k-members is different. That means that the k-member can/will be a different width AND that the correction factor that must be used when determining what affect the different FCAs have on the track is also different. In addition, the FCA pivot height on the different k-members isn't the same, so that changes the FCA angle in the front view which changes the trackwidth as the wheels are pulled in or pushed out. If you want really accurate predictions, be prepared to do a lot of 3d modeling or just use the treadwidth data in the MVMA sheets and correct it with the wheel offset for the wheels on that year and submodel car.

    It looks like the SCCA has published all of the MVMA sheets that they have at the link below.

    https://www.crbscca.com/open/

    The link below also has a large number of them.

    http://wildaboutcarsonline.com/cgi-b...=9990609253945
    Jack Hidley
    Maximum Motorsports Tech Support

  7. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hidley View Post
    The only change to the trackwidth that makes is due to the k-member width. This is not super easy to compare because the toe angle of the different k-members is different. That means that the k-member can/will be a different width AND that the correction factor that must be used when determining what affect the different FCAs have on the track is also different. In addition, the FCA pivot height on the different k-members isn't the same, so that changes the FCA angle in the front view which changes the trackwidth as the wheels are pulled in or pushed out. If you want really accurate predictions, be prepared to do a lot of 3d modeling or just use the treadwidth data in the MVMA sheets and correct it with the wheel offset for the wheels on that year and submodel car.

    It looks like the SCCA has published all of the MVMA sheets that they have at the link below.

    https://www.crbscca.com/open/

    The link below also has a large number of them.

    http://wildaboutcarsonline.com/cgi-b...=9990609253945
    These are great Jack. Thank you.

  8. #33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Two86fiveoh's View Post
    The SN-95 arms, spindles fit great with S197 wheels. Can easily turn lock to lock with 245/45-17's without rubbing (255's would easily fit), no rubbing over hard bumps, etc. Drives amazing.

    Edit: Stock 86 K Member
    Jeremiah,

    How does the rear look? I would assume about the same if you used 94+ axles.

  9. #34

    Default

    This is the rear with fox length housing and SN95 axles, I've since added 1/4" spacers.
    Attached Images Attached Images   
    Jeremiah

    1986 Mustang GT 5spd, 3.27's
    PimpXS ECU/Android Single DIN Touchscreen
    SN95 Cobra Brakes/SN95 Front LCA's/Axles/S197 Wheels
    1998 Explorer Engine/Stock HO Cam 281rwhp/326rwtq

  10. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Two86fiveoh's View Post
    This is the rear with fox length housing and SN95 axles, I've since added 1/4" spacers.
    Nice thanks

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

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