k-member question...again

Topic: k-member question...again (Read 1926 times) previous topic - next topic

k-member question...again

December 12, 2006, 07:36:15 PM

I have used the search and there seems to be alot of different info.

Here is my situation. I have a 87 Turbo coupe. I added 17x9 fronts that hung out too far. I put on 87-93 mustang control arms and c/c plates. Now the wheels sit in a little too far(but ok) and rub the strut lightly.

I am thinking of putting in a tubular k-member. Is the Mustang k-member narrower than mine? Any ideas if a 87-93 k-memberwith 94-95 arms would work for me? If I can't be sure of fitment, I really can't afford to spend the money on a guess.

Any help would be great.

Jim

k-member question...again

Reply #1 – December 12, 2006, 07:53:13 PM

the mustang k-memeber should be the same as 83-85 bird/cats. wider than your 87.

im will be runnin a mustang tubular k-member with sn95 length arms. to get the tires under the fender i am usin 17x8 w/a +40 offset.

k-member question...again

Reply #2 – December 12, 2006, 08:36:01 PM

If that's the case, then an 87-93 complete k-member kit would work for me as I am looking to be just a little wider. Correct?

k-member question...again

Reply #3 – December 12, 2006, 10:49:54 PM

in theory yes. the fox stang k member will be wider than the stocker in your car. im supprised its in too far though. sounds to me like those 17x9s have a nasty offset or something. most guys fiddling with 17x8s are right at the fender...take a look at the AJE k members. a decent peice for a fair price. that or a MM unit.

k-member question...again

Reply #4 – December 13, 2006, 02:39:38 PM

When I bought my 94' stang tubular lower control arms for my bird from Maximum Motorsports, that the 79' -86' stang K members were the same as the 83' - 86' T-birds K members, from 87' - 00' Stangs(when I purchased the arms w/coilover conversions) and the 87' -88' Birds were the same. And that the difference between the 2 groups was that the mounting points for the later model cars were moved forward slightly for better steering geometry. I'm currently running 90' Lincoln LSC front spindles w/ 94' Stang tubular lower arms and coilovers. For wheels I have 16x8's up front with no rubbing. But now they really don't rub because the fenders have been removed because of the work being done to the car.

k-member question...again

Reply #5 – December 14, 2006, 06:00:46 PM

Are you saying the actual k-member cradle itself is wider? Any ideas on how much?
Jim

k-member question...again

Reply #6 – December 14, 2006, 06:23:18 PM

Quote

im will be runnin a mustang tubular k-member with sn95 length arms. to get the tires under the fender i am usin 17x8 w/a +40 offset.

is the +40 offset needed, or is it more for looks? I'm thinking of putting 83-85 tbird/mustang A-arms on my 88 k-member, and was wondering if +40 offset would work instead of changing A-arms. Sorry, not trying to hijack this thread.

k-member question...again

Reply #7 – December 14, 2006, 08:05:29 PM

well with the wider k-member spacin of the mustang unit(vs. my stock 87) plus the width of the sn95 legnth arms(same as stock 87), i need the +40 to get em under the fenders.

what are you tryin to accomplish by changin to the shorter arms?

k-member question...again

Reply #8 – December 14, 2006, 08:35:50 PM

I changed to the shorter arms because the wheels were sticking out too far. So naturally I don't want a tubular k-member and a-arms that are going to be wider that the factory setup(k-member+sn95 arms). So if a tubular k-member is anywhere from .75-1.5" wider(overall) I will be fine with the shorter 87-93 arms.

k-member question...again

Reply #9 – December 15, 2006, 12:05:26 PM

let me know when you figure this out and how it works cause im getting those rims and the sticking out isnt going to be an opition

k-member question...again

Reply #10 – December 15, 2006, 06:13:03 PM

Quote

what are you tryin to accomplish by changin to the shorter arms?

lowering the car, and the front tires are probably gonna get stuffed up behind the fender a tad.