Those look fantastic! 
Those look fantastic!
Rodan said:Those look fantastic!
I think so too. I couldn't stomach the usual Mustang wheels...at least 80% of what people choose is some variant of Torque Thrust type 5 spoke wheels. I don't know whether they really think TTs look that great or whether they don't realize there are other options.
Torque Thrust do look good, and are 'vintage' looking, but you're right that they are on every other Mustang out there. Kind of like Weld drag wheels in the 90s.
The Minilites are also 'vintage' looking, but more 'race' than 'street', and you won't see them on too many other cars.
My FIL just picked up a 65. I immediately "spent 10-15k" for what I'd do to the car if it were mine. Thankfully, it isn't...but I like the idea behind the Cyclone.
Wheels/tires installed.....almost makes you imagine its a car and not a pile of parts doesn't it?
the wheels and stance looks perfect.
i love the taillights. obviously mustang, but still a head-scratcher for people who actually notice.
AngryCorvair (Forum Supporter) said:i love the taillights. obviously mustang, but still a head-scratcher for people who actually notice.
Heh, I still have a decent amount of body work to do before that panel looks the way it does in my head(and plenty of bumper work to finish as well)
Its kind of funny when you have to buy wheels and tires to proceed to the next step in the project. I now know my oil pan has 6" of road clearance at ride height...which is a good thing, since I need to drop the engine about 1/2" or so, I can now continue on to my next major project....converting to front steer while maintaining the original-type front suspension. The basic plan involves using a MII crossmember, steering rack, and 2" drop spindles for a MII, but none of the suspension components, all my measurements say the plan is workable, and aside fromt he spindles all the parts have come in....I just have to remove the engine and trans again to start work...which is honestly going to be an all-day thing because of my custom longtubes.
HotNotch said:the wheels and stance looks perfect.
+1
Looks rad, looking forward to watching the front suspension come together.
Shavarsh said:Looks rad, looking forward to watching the front suspension come together.
Who woulda thunk that a MII crossmember would have been appealing strictly as a steering rack hanger? I chose a weld-up kit because it will have to be heavily modified anyway to fit with the shock towers still in place....the fun begins soon.
I love the wheels! I have a set of Rota RBs for my Europa, real Minilites are too pricey for me!
Very cool project with some unusual, interesting, and very cool specifics!
So after getting the engine out this weekend I started fitting the MII crossmember so I could hang the rack:
I bet you have never seen someone who only wants MII pieces just for the steering. I was still messing with crossmember fitment and debating on bolt-on vs weld on when the spindle stuff came in:
These are a new MII spindle offering from CPP that allow the use of a C7 Vette hub:
The setup has a lot of nice things going for it...C7 hubs offer much better performance than any spindle-pin design for performance driving. Also worth noting is that by including or removing the spacers in the kit you can narrow the front track of the car up to 1/2" on each side of the car...which is very helpful with wheel and tire fitment. And of course....using Corvette parts also allows you to use Corvette brakes:
These are 13" rotors and some large 4 piston aluminum calipers. In theory if I had a wheel larger than 17" I could even go larger...but I wouldn't go any bigger with wheels anyway. Its a silly thought for a 2700lb car anyway.
Just a "before" reference pic with the stock rear-steer spindles.
I am facing 2 issues here(possibly inter-related) in fitting the MII spindles to the early mustang type control arms.
1. While the ball joint taper angle seems to be correct, the diamter itself has to be off from one generation to the next, otherwise the spindles wouldn't be sitting so high on the ball joint. I figure I am going to have to have the spindle ball joint holes reamed out by a machine shop to fit correctly(or buy a hugely expensive reaming bit for a one time job and do it myself if I am feeling brave).
2. The biggest issue is of course the steering arm height in comparison to the tie rods. Its actually not as bad as this pic would indicate...since the rack isn't truly mounted in place, just held there with too-small bolts. Also I can still cut the crossmember and bring it up more...I figure I have something like 3/4" it can come up. Doing so deviates from the instructions to install with drop spindles...but the reality is that those instructions are assuming you are actually using the MII suspension which has a LCA mount significantly lower than the stock mount. I figure in the end with a combination of shenanigans and a bump-steer kit I will be able to get away with it.
1. This just keeps getting better
2. I have a 7 degree ball joint reamer I leant Tavarsh (I think that's his screen name-otherwise, sorry Correction- Shavarsh-doh) for his awesome Pinto build. I'd be glad to do the same for you. Just pat shipping back to me. FYI, he had to level his upright in a drill press to get the angle right. No hand drilling on this kind of thing, it appears.
wheelsmithy (Joe-with-an-L) said:1. This just keeps getting better
2. I have a 7 degree ball joint reamer I leant Tavarsh (I think that's his screen name-otherwise, sorry) for his awesome Pinto build. I'd be glad to do the same for you. Just pat shipping back to me. FYI, he had to level his upright in a drill press to get the angle right. No hand drilling on this kind of thing, it appears.
Heh, might have to take you up on that if 7 degrees ends up being what I need. Kinda hard to find info on the taper angle I need. What did he do on his Pinto build that he needed to ream the spindles? The pinto spindles are nearly identical to the MII spindles after all.
He used Miata uprights on MII a-arms or something like that. Let e know if you want the loaner.
Superlites...mmmmm
In reply to wheelsmithy (Joe-with-an-L) :
I think I will take you up on that offer of the reamer. Everything I can find says 7 degrees is what I need. I do have a drill press, but not exactly sure how I will set it up to do this task. Guess I need to do some research, surely it can't be too hard right?
Feel free to check out my thread to see how I did it in the bridgeport. I haven't gotten to the part where I used them in my build thread yet. Thanks again Joel!
Shavarsh said:Feel free to check out my thread to see how I did it in the bridgeport. I haven't gotten to the part where I used them in my build thread yet. Thanks again Joel!
Interesting. Maybe I should actually be asking if I am imagining a problem that doesn't exist. Sure, the ball joints may not seat as deeply as the stock spindles....but the reality is the stock spindles I had to use spacers under the castle nuts anyway. I could in theory just use a slightly shorter castle nut I guess. The question is what if any difference would this make if I just left it like this?(aside from possible needing taller dust boots).
I think the best thing to do though is to do research and see if I can just find a better screw-in ball joint option. These are Moog K772 which from what I can see are the correct taper. I think its really just that the stud is too long...a shorter stud option might do the trick.
I decided on how deep to machine the taper by test fitting the ball joints and looking at the witness marks to see how much of the taper was in contact. You can try to add some marker or something on the pin if its hard to see. If there is a large enough % of the taper in contact you may be fine as is.
Interesting stuff here! This will hopefully work better than my old Unisteer rack that was electrified and 1.5 times quickened (but still rear-mounted). Are you losing much ground clearance with the crossmember?
In reply to Shavarsh :
I think I actually am fine as-is. The taper is correct for the spindle to start with...and I notice QA1 advertises the longer stud on some of their ball joints as a way to raise RCA(meaning they don't think that a higher mounting point is hurting anything). I need a very slightly shorter castle nut to get a cotter pin through...and maybe some different dust boots....but looking hard it I think it will be ok.
As for ground clearance...I measured and calculated that while the engine was in(loaded ride height) I will end up right at 5" of ground clearance to the cross member if I don't lift it higher(which I probably will for a better rack placement) I estimate a total of 5.75" of ground clearance of some quick and dirty measurements for best rack height. I will need to confirm that by string lining the pivot points to look at bump steer rack positioning though.
Drawing a line through the control arm pivot points make it pretty obvious I am going to have to shorten the steering rack...likely by about 5" or so. The green lines show typical MII control arm pivots and why they don't have to shorten the rack. It makes a huge difference in mounting the rack below the control arms as opposed to between them. Oh well, this should actually be a fun little side show project in the build. Never shortened a rack before but it looks fairly easy.
Modifying the crossmember to allow a bolt-in install instead of weld-in. Removing engine and trans together is always easier if you don't have to dodge the crossmember. I do still have to drill the holes, and the holes in the "ears" that use the LCA bolt to mount will need to be slotted for the camber kit. I decided not to add rear "ears" simply because the crossmember would become a real PITA to install and remove with 6 holes to line up. 4 will do to hang a rack and act as a crossmember.
You'll need to log in to post.
