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

 

Thread: Mustang II narrowed control arms
          
   
   

Reply To Thread
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Hot Rod Roy is offline CHR Member Visit my Photo Gallery
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Mission Viejo
    Car Year, Make, Model: '84 Corvette
    Posts
    43

    Quote Originally Posted by Henry Rifle
    Have you thought about moving the mounting hole for the lower A-arm inboard 3/4" rather than shortening the arm? That way, both arms stay at stock length, and you're just moving the whole assembly inboard.
    When you start messing with the control arm pivot points, the inner tie rod ends on the steering rack won't be compatible with your front end geometry. As the suspension moves up and down, the arc that the outer tie rod ends move will be different than the arc at the steering arms, so you'll be forcing the toe-in to change . . . and you'll have the dreaded "bump-steer".

  2. #2
    Ed Rodder's Avatar
    Ed Rodder is offline CHR Member Visit my Photo Gallery
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Agua Dulce
    Posts
    94

    Quote Originally Posted by Hot Rod Roy
    When you start messing with the control arm pivot points, the inner tie rod ends on the steering rack won't be compatible with your front end geometry. As the suspension moves up and down, the arc that the outer tie rod ends move will be different than the arc at the steering arms, so you'll be forcing the toe-in to change . . . and you'll have the dreaded "bump-steer".
    I do know that on my 48 F1 pu the width is a litte wider then stock mustang II and the rack has rack extenders to make up the differance NOT longer tie rods. I believe that is to resove the bump steer problem, which I do not have. Works great.
    1949 Ford F1 stocker, V8 flatty
    1950 Ford F1 pu street rod
    1948 Ford F3 pu projec
    1948 Ford 2.5 ton dually project
    1953 Chevy 3100 AD project to my 85 S10pu
    1968 2.2 Ecotec Baja Bug kingCoil etc.
    1998.5 Dodge diesel 4x4 many extras

  3. #3
    Henry Rifle's Avatar
    Henry Rifle is offline CHR Member Visit my Photo Gallery
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Little Elm
    Car Year, Make, Model: 34 Ford Low Boy w/ZZ430 Clone
    Posts
    3,890

    Quote Originally Posted by Hot Rod Roy
    When you start messing with the control arm pivot points, the inner tie rod ends on the steering rack won't be compatible with your front end geometry. As the suspension moves up and down, the arc that the outer tie rod ends move will be different than the arc at the steering arms, so you'll be forcing the toe-in to change . . . and you'll have the dreaded "bump-steer".
    In theory, you're correct. However, I'll repeat what I said above:

    With the very limited travel most street rods have, I don't see a problem. This is not just conjecture. I shortend the upper A-arms on my '30 A-bone by an inch, and moved the lower ones inboard an inch. I saw NO problem with steering, no bump steer, no wandering, no effect at all. Interstate, city streets, drag strip (at 119 mph) . . . drove like a go-kart.
    Jack

    Gone to Texas

Reply To Thread

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