what a nightmare, i only did one side because after letting the car down the new a arm moved the wheel and tire in like 2" and it doesnt even look like the alignment could ever be made right, not to mention how stupid it looks with the wheel/tire in so far. AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH, 190 dollar arms, wtf am i gonna do..
atleast my GMS coil over kit works. just need caster camber plates...
who's the manufacturer?
What k-member are you using?
Thanks,
Chris
were they fox mustang arms, or sn-95?
If I'm not mistaken (and I have been mistaken before, believe it or not), a Mustang K-member will put your ball joints back out close to where they belong. I think the T-Bird K-member's control arm mounting points are further inboard to work with the longer T-Bird arms, so Mustang arms will bring the ball joints in on a T-Bird member. Conversely, T-Bird arms on a Mustang member will put the ball joints outboard. I'm sure somebody that knows what the hell they are talking about will chime in for verification though...
ChuckW has stated that many times already what ThunderChicken just said.You are 100% correct.
have to run a stang k member.....
Aren't the SN-95 A-arms the same dimensions as the fox t-bird/cougar arms?
Not quite .. the 87-88's do at least. The early Tbirds use the Fox Mustang arms...
Also, be careful on the whole "TBird K-member" thing. The different mounting points only applies to the 87-88's.....and only the TC's at that.
I'm not 100% certain on the whole 87-88
TC only thing, but since we have not had as a group everyone with an 86-88 climb under their car and measure the width of the control arm mounting points and the length of their control arms :p
yeah im using the stock K member, that must be my problem?
At the very least then you need SN-95 length tubular arms....
Perfect time for a tubular fox stang k member!
with the mustang tubular K what do i use for motor mounts?
well guessing it is for a mustang, I would say a 79-93 4banger, or maybe 84 SVO mounts. I am not quite sure.
A set of my SVO/Mustang mounts :D
(http://www.turbochuck.com/images/Motor%20Mounts/Type%201/Type1_1.jpg)
Seriously though, you would use any of the std Mustang 4 cyl mounts.
lol, guess i wasnt thinkin on that one! chuck do u have any of those mounts left??
No, but I will be making more. If you want me to add you to the notification list send me an email.
cwarren@indy.net
hey! i'm looking for a set of control arms for the front of my 86 turbo coupe.
chuck, i highly doubt that the k-member between the 87-88 turbo coupe and the other models are different. ford likes to use the same parts or cross reference them alot, so i don't think they'd like to add cost to a good profit that they where making on the birds. hell, look at the svo mustang, left over parts different wheels.
well, i've got an 88 TC k-member sitting on the floor in the garage, so if any one wants measurements, just ask and i'll whip out the trusty tape
I doubt it too.... but until someone measures one of each I won't be convinced one way or the other :D
Break out that tape measure Pressure Cooked.....
ok, i went and measured both the TC k and a tubular fox stang k as well. Interesting results to say the least. The TC k is as follows: forward a-arm mount points =23" apart center of bolt to center of bolt. rearward mount points=30 1/2 "
apart. Stang k as follows: forward mount points 23 3/4" apart. rearward mount points 32" Now conventional wisdom agrees with rear points: 3/4" per side, but the front is odd. I even double checked the measurements and still only came up with a total of 3/4" difference for both sides. i dunno
Pressure Cooked, do you have the measurements of a V6 K member, to compare to the TC k?
I'm curious if they'er different.
I'd measure mine, but my tape is at work, only thing I didn't bring homw with me friday night. :mad:
sorry, all i have is the above two k members.
ahhh, no biggie, I'll bring my tape homw with me tomorrow night, and measure a V6 k member, post the stats here, unless someone else does before I get to it. Not that it's that big of a deal, but since the other measurements are in here...
so many areas talking about the tubular suspension i figured this was the newest..... i have a 83 cougar w/ 5.0 and want the tubular k's and arms.... are they a direct fit? some say yes because of the year, some say i need spacers..... is there a difinitive answer for my (the wifes) car?
any info will help before i spend a buttload of money without getting everything i need
i would say fox stang tubular components is a "yes" on a 83 for sure. even if you need spacers it's really no big deal; they actually give you a bit more hood clearance because they drop the motor a little (the spacers, not the k-member itself). i would highly recommend going to coilovers as well for height adjustability and the fact most aftermarket tubular arms have no provision for the factory spring setup. hope this helps some.
but i thought the factory suspension WAS a coil-over.... i could be wrong
no it is not.
i see..... duh........ i guess this is the first car i've had without front wheel drive, so i'm used to having a regular strut and not a modified one.... my bad :dunno:
actually, we have the "modified" macpherson strut system, modified meaning you can take the strut out, w/o removing the spring...
My spring comes out with the strut:D. But I dont have to take the spring off. lol anyway there is a difference between the 83 K and the 87 for sure. Its a long story so I wont go into it but I have the K from an 87 in mine and the arms from an 83 and my cars bollegged until I can get it swapped back which will hopefully be next weekend. It sucks the bottom of the tire in quite a bit which in turn eats the outside of the tires off like theres no tomorrow. its a big enough difference about 3 inches around the outside of my tire is bald. thank god for having four more tires mounted and ready to go.
87 T-bird two tone diarrhea color :laughing:
:laughing: :laughing: :toilet:
Yeah lol I think its actually like taupe or something.The dark kinda looks like what you get after a long night of partying.:D