Welcome to Club Hot Rod!  The premier site for everything to do with Hot Rod, Customs, Low Riders, Rat Rods, and more. 

  •  » Members from all over the US and the world!
  •  » Help from all over the world for your questions
  •  » Build logs for you and all members
  •  » Blogs
  •  » Image Gallery
  •  » Many thousands of members and hundreds of thousands of posts! 

YES! I want to register an account for free right now!  p.s.: For registered members this ad will NOT show

 
Like Tree15Likes

Thread: 500 hp/550 lb-ft from a 390?
          
   
   

Reply To Thread
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5
Results 61 to 68 of 68
  1. #61
    Jeff Perkins is offline CHR Member Visit my Photo Gallery
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Conyers
    Car Year, Make, Model: 67 Mustang Coupe
    Posts
    26

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/rwb74mabr4...25542.jpg?dl=0


    Try the link above for a pic of the suspension....I'm apparently not bright enough to upload a picture here. Nevermind the fact that I build communications networks nationally...

  2. #62
    jerry clayton's Avatar
    jerry clayton is offline CHR Member Visit my Photo Gallery
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Bartlett
    Posts
    6,792

    I hope you have researched those ball joints-in the oem mustang the upper ball joint carried the weight in compression of upper arm-this set up has weight HANGING (pull) on lower joint-------plus going to be some serious forces during braking

  3. #63
    Jeff Perkins is offline CHR Member Visit my Photo Gallery
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Conyers
    Car Year, Make, Model: 67 Mustang Coupe
    Posts
    26

    The research has been pretty exhaustive. This setup is from Street or Track and has been race proven. Baer brakes were chosen as well. Besides, ANYTHING short of pine 2x4's would be an improvement over the factory Ford design...

  4. #64
    jerry clayton's Avatar
    jerry clayton is offline CHR Member Visit my Photo Gallery
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Bartlett
    Posts
    6,792

    Well, actually, the Ford OEM design was quite advanced at the time-----and I truly hope that you don't have any problems with it---------
    DennyW likes this.

  5. #65
    stovens's Avatar
    stovens is offline CHR Member Visit my Photo Gallery
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Petaluma
    Car Year, Make, Model: 48 Ford F1
    Posts
    9,553

    Glad your back posting here Jeff. This is an interesting build filled with good info to help others.
    " "No matter where you go, there you are!" Steve.

  6. #66
    Jeff Perkins is offline CHR Member Visit my Photo Gallery
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Conyers
    Car Year, Make, Model: 67 Mustang Coupe
    Posts
    26

    The difference is night and day. The old stuff is awful comparatively. I've driven both and can assure all that this design is FAR better. More control of the tire contact patch as well as beefier spindles and better braking. If the design from 67/68 was all that spectacular, they'd use it to this day...

    More hubris: I'm ditching the leaf springs out back as well....for a 4 link Martz design...and a Tremec 5 speed in place of the slushbox or 4 speed.

    The goal is not to build a "fresh for 1967" Mustang. The goal is to have a fully modern vehicle with a fuel injected (FITech) FE powerplant. The engine will be a solid roller (Competition Cams) build with Edelbrock heads and intake. Accessory drive will happen via serpentine belt from Billet Specialties, pistons are Diamond units supplied by Barry at Survival Motorsports, rods come from SCAT, the crank is stock. Ignition from MSD and let us not forget air conditioning! Important here in the sunny South ;-)
    Last edited by Jeff Perkins; 11-25-2016 at 10:17 AM.
    34_40, stovens and 40FordDeluxe like this.

  7. #67
    Jeff Perkins is offline CHR Member Visit my Photo Gallery
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Conyers
    Car Year, Make, Model: 67 Mustang Coupe
    Posts
    26

    I definitely plan on lowering it a bit as this setup allows for easy ride height adjustments. 18x10 wheels for the back and 17x9 for the front is what I'm leaning towards. With the power levels expected from the engine, stock rubber just isn't gonna be able to keep up. I'm not looking to get in the weeds mind you, just enough to set the stance and lower CoG a bit.
    stovens and 40FordDeluxe like this.

  8. #68
    jerry clayton's Avatar
    jerry clayton is offline CHR Member Visit my Photo Gallery
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Bartlett
    Posts
    6,792

    I searched that outfit and seems like they are pretty well into what they do---good luck with your alignment people----
    Jeff Perkins likes this.

Reply To Thread
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Links monetized by VigLink