Ok, before anybody jumps my case I've already searched. I can't ever find anything relevant to what I want to know with the search feature on this site. What is involved in making Mustang plates work in a Tbird? I know MM makes Tbird specific ones but I personally have issues with MM and would like to avoid them. I'm using Mustang coilovers with stock Tbird strut mounts at the moment just to roll the car around. I would like to modify whatever is necessary to use the Mustang plates but I have no idea what's involved.
the three bolts that hold them in are not in the exact same spot . I believe that you have to drill one new hole , but I'm not 100% sure it's only one
Well if that's really all there is to it then that's good news.
On the passenger side, the pattern is shorter front to rear. as stated, you will need to redrill one hole to make them fit.
On the driver's side, the pattern is flipped and shorter. depending on the adjustment range of your brand of plates this might be an issue for getting into proper alignment specs.
If you already have mustang plates, I'd say mock em up and see what you like. If not, I wouldnt waste your time; just get the MM parts
I think when it comes down to it I'll just weld the holes shut and drill my own in the correct places.
On another note, does anyone know the exact length of the rear control arms? I'm talking to one company about making control arms for us but I need the exact center-center measurements. I tried to measure my car awhile ago but I couldn't get very accurate measurements in the dark with the car in the ground. I got 10.25 for the uppers and 17.75 for the lowers.
There are a few vendors out there BESIDES MM that have rear control arms for us, but this is the one most people go with...
CHE Performance:
http://www.cheperformance.com/cartgenie/prodList.asp?scat=30
I don't want to ask about your MM experience. Because personally, I have had GREAT success with MM stuff. A little pricey is my only complaint.
3/4" is what I've read regarding length difference, and that's the amount I used when modding the IRS cradle.
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure they make a quality product based solely on other's experiences. I'm not trying to talk anyone out of purchasing from them. I've never used anything from MM but I have seen it fail in a drag environment. I know that's not their intended crowd and I guess I should have been more clear that I'm not trying to bash MM.
Is that the difference in the lowers or what?
I've been speaking with Kevin Slaby, owner of Baseline Suspensions, today about rear suspension for our cars. I asked him if he could make control arms that were the correct length for our cars. Apparently the lowers are nearly the same length and the difference can be made up with the adjusters. However, the uppers are about an inch longer. He can make them the correct length though for about the same price. The thing I was most excited to hear though was that he could also make his relocated upper Pro Launch kit with the correct am length for us. For those that don't know, the relocated uppers correct the instant center issues that the stock uppers have. More than likely I'll be using his Pro Launch #3 kit on my car.
I'm not bashing anybody else's product here. I just thought I'd share a little info for people looking for a more drag oriented suspension.
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure they make a quality product based solely on other's experiences. I'm not trying to talk anyone out of purchasing from them. Just talk to them. If you like what you hear them by all means, jump on it.
Is that the difference in the lowers or what?
I've been speaking with Kevin Slaby, owner of Baseline Suspensions, today about rear suspension for our cars. I asked him if he could make control arms that were the correct length for our cars. Apparently the lowers are nearly the same length and the difference can be made up with the adjusters. However, the uppers are about an inch longer. He can make them the correct length though for about the same price. The thing I was most excited to hear though was that he could also make his relocated upper Pro Launch kit with the correct am length for us. For those that don't know, the relocated uppers correct the instant center issues that the stock uppers have. More than likely I'll be using his Pro Launch #3 kit on my car.
I'm not bashing anybody else's product here. I just thought I'd share a little info for people looking for a more drag oriented suspension.
correct
I don't know about the uppers, but I'm sure someone here does.
I don't know how many times we have to go over this same subject...
Uppers are 1-1/8" longer, lowers are 3/8-1/2" longer (don't have the info right in front of me on the lowers).
I guess I don't get it. Weld up the holes on the top of the shock tower, layout new holes to install Mustang CC plates (get monk to bless the hole pattern), install Mustang CC plates, and now I guess pray again you can achieve the alignment specs you need for your application. All of this instead of just getting the MM plates that bolt in and will get you what most need alignment wise for street, road courses, and drag racing.
Is there something in particular that that the MM pieces will not do that the Mustang style CC plates will as far as adjustment for your application? I am seriously interested as this sounds like a lot of work and layout to get the geometry correct.
Darren
Sounds more like he has personal issues with MM.
I don't doubt that this has been gone over a million times but I can't ever find what I'm looking for with the search on this site. Even after asking this question I still don't have an exact measurement on the center-center length for the Tbird arms.
As far as doing the work to make the Mustang plates work, what's so difficult about welding a few holes shut and drilling new ones? Issues with MM aside, I'd rather spend an hour doing some work and saving $70 and buying from a company I actually like.
The measurements for a Mustang that I've found are 17.625 and 9.25 so I'm assuming you're measurements are 18 and 10.375? I was laying under my car in the dark trying to get the measurements so mine probably aren't right but they were pretty close.
I can't verify the lowers until I get home from the office, and dig out my info from when we were making them.
Thanks
Uppers - 10.375"
Lowers - 18.125"
Cool, thanks for the help. I got the car in the air today and measured again and came up exactly .125" shorter on both than you did so I was probably just coming up a little short because I was at a weird angle.
The search function has not been working correctly since we swapped servers. Don't sweat it. Good luck, and let us know how much work it is and what's involved.
Those measurements were from having both arms out of the car and on a bench, next to Mustang arms. It WAS at least 11-12 years ago now, but I have the paper I wrote them down on. :p
Thank God lol. The search function has been driving me crazy. I'll definitely be documenting it along with everything else.
I had the arms out of my other car a few months ago and it never occurred to me to measure them since I was just going to get them from CHE. I'll definitely be writing it down for safe keeping now though.
I am not saying that removing the old ones, welding up the holes, and drilling the new holes will be hard at all. What I am getting at is laying out the new holes for the Mustang CC plates and keeping the geometry correct as they relate to the position of the LCA mount and spindle location. I am not sure what or if there is a difference between the Birds and Mustangs but one would think that Ford would have used the same part in this area if the geometry would have allowed...then again.
Darren
For a typical setup I'd definitely agree with you. However, I don't have a single piece of stock suspension on the front of my car. The spindles are from a v8 fox stang, tubular 94-95 k, tubular fox control arms, and coilovers. As oddball as this setup is I'm not even sure I could get the car in alignment with the MM plates with the stock mounting holes. The car is going to be slammed so I'll be needing even more adjustment. When it's all said and done I don't think it will be any more work. As far as keeping the geometry the same, all you'd have to do is set the adjustments on the plates so you would have plenty of room to move in the direction you needed, set them on the tower so the top of the strut would be in the factory location, square them up, and drill new holes.
I'm definitely not suggesting that people that just need more adjustment because they lowered their car take this route because it's more than likely not worth the effort. I should have mentioned I have a slightly unusual setup. As in depth as this build is, a little fabricating for the C/C plates is the least of my concerns lol.
I do agree with you for a car that has the balljoint in the stock location. However, my balljoint is about an inch closer to the body than stock and the car is lowered considerably and all of my suspension is from Team Z for a Mustang. I think this throws the factory differences out the window, but maybe not. In my mind, these changes would somewhat cancel each other out in the camber department. I could be wrong here, since this is far from my area of expertise, but I think that as long as I had the plates adjusted equally, squared to the suspension, and the upper mount in the same location as factory I would be set. Just drill new holes and go. Adjustments are the same regardless of what plates you use. The only difference is how they mount. I'm going to grab some strut mounts that a Mustang guy is trashing and see how difficult this will be. If out looks like more trouble than the price difference I'll bite the bullet and get the MM's.
The difference in installing the Mustang strut mounts is as simple as elongating the front hole 1/2" or so. Not much more to it. The reason the TBird ones use the larger footprint is most likely due to the fact that the bushing OD is quite a bit larger than that of the Mustang. IIRC, the orientation of the center of the strut bushing was the same between the two as referenced from the side of the mount with 2 studs, so geometry will not change.
There are 2 layouts for the Fox Mustang strut mounts, 79-89 and 90-93. It's not an issue in regards to CC plates, as those are designed for all 79-93 cars, but if you're grabbing stock Mustang strut mounts, you need to use the earlier ones. You can make the 90-93 ones work, but if the car is lowered, you'll be having to mod the adjustment slots on the strut towers quite a bit. BTDT.
I'm not planning to drive the car with the stock mustang mounts, I was just going to use them to see how much work the mustang plates would be. Is the only difference in the 79-89 and 90-93 mounts the adjustment and the bolt holes are the same?
Like I said, the only "work" involved is elongating the front mounting hole on the strut tower rearward a bit. That's it.
The early ones work better. More "even" from side to side when one is turned 180* to match the TBird mounting.
No sense in futzing with it. If you plan on using the Mustang CC plates, use them, it's an easy mod for install. Just make sure when the driver side plate is flipped around to be used in a Tbird, it matches the pass side. Sometimes the caster adjustment section of the plates are flip-flopped on the Mustang units if they manf them asymmetrical.
Cool, sounds simple enough.
Learn something new everyday. I just went the easy route I guess.
Darren
I've edited a few of my posts in this thread since they looked rather negative towards MM. That wasn't my intention. I look at suspension from a strictly drag point of view and that is why I said I had issues with MM. I've never seen them fail in a street environment, just drag racing.
How do they fail? Im looking at final build as a road racer / drag / hard street am I in trouble with MM CC plates?
If you have seen them fail I would be interested in how they failed. They are by far the best CC plate on the market. Hell, Griggs Racing will tell you to buy MM's CC plates and then use the rest of the Griggs front suspension. If Griggs is using one of their biggest competitor's CC plates it should say something. I have seen some 10.5 cars punish the MM CC plates with rear bumper dragging wheel stands only to come down on the front suspension and have something else fail other than the CC plates. Straight off MM's site:
"Warranty: Maximum Motorsports Caster Camber Plates part #MMCC8388 have a limited lifetime warranty against spherical bearing failure or plate failure. That's right; if the spherical bearing is damaged, or the plates break while driving, we will replace that component for free. This warranty applies only to the original retail purchaser of genuine Maximum Motorsports (MM) Caster Camber Plates."
I just did not want one person's opinion to sour a very well engineered and manufactured product for our cars.
Darren
I've never seen the cc plates fail, just the control arms. I'm sure the cc plates are fine, I've never heard anything bad said about them.
That was definitely not my intention, which was why I came back to this topic and edited what could be misinterpreted as bashing. It all comes down to me not wanting to use MM, nothing more. If anybody else wants to use their stuff that's fine, I'll never try to talk anybody out of it.