Vintage Mustang Forums banner

1 - 20 of 59 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I have asked this on a couple of forums and have yet to get a response. I have access to a few independant front suspension setups from 2000 up crown vics that a buddy uses for Demolition Derby. He pulls them and replaces them with a traditional front setup.

Why would this not work in an early mustang? I have measured it four times and it appears the dimensions are correct to fit outside the unibody on the 66. 34" roughly on the inside of the cradle. The only problem I see is the WMS to WMS being about 4" wider than the rear 8.8 that I am installing in the car. This could be rectified very easily.

This setup is widely used in ford trucks and is complete bolt in assembly with rack and pinion steering, disc brakes,5x4.5 bolt pattern hubs and it is self contained. Why won't this work? What say you gentlemen?
 

·
I won a special award
Joined
·
7,409 Posts
If you have a welder and know how to use it, you can make just about anything work. But it'll most likely be a serious compromise and not work as well as the original setup. With the availability of used Crown Vics laying around, someone would already have done it if it was worth it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Here's the thing. He sold one to a guy no too long ago that was considering the same thing. Of course no contact info. for me to contact the guy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,166 Posts
sounds like a great idea if it will work. Let us know how you make out with the plan if you decide to do it. That would be a great option over the aftermarket IFS systems considering how many of those cars are out there in the junkyards waiting for the crusher.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I can't find anyone that has even tried it. The ford truck guys are swapping these into early fords as fast as they can pull them. They have technical drawings of them online. From the one I am looking at, I can't see that it won't work and all I keep hearing is " With a torch and a welder you can make anything work". While that is true, I can. It makes more sense to try and find advice from those who have seen and done more than I. In this case I am not sure that anyone has even tried it. As far as the crown vic front suspension having a small gain over a mustang. That is riduculous. The 2000 crown vic front suspension is superior in every way to a stock mustang. It isn't even comparing apples to apples.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,588 Posts
i would love to watch this happen and think u have a great idea. however the original suspension is a great design when you pull the flaws out...i have roller bearings in my control arms as well as a bunch of other upgrades and my 66 will handle As well as any late model mustang
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
I agree. This isn't my first rodeo with early mustangs. The cost to get the front suspension and disc brakes up to par with a late model car is signifigant. No doubt about that. If this works it will replace the entire suspension, steering and brakes in one fell swoop. No idea if it will or won't mind you, just thinking creatively. These things are in every salvage yard in the country and can be had very cheaply.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,602 Posts
As far as the crown vic front suspension having a small gain over a mustang. That is riduculous. The 2000 crown vic front suspension is superior in every way to a stock mustang. It isn't even comparing apples to apples.
We'll see about that.
Feel free to post the lengths of the arms and the knuckle length.
I'll run the best case scenario AFA the camber gain.

ex-Global West GM
1991-1995
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Discussion Starter #9 (Edited)
Are you making an implication that a stock drum brake,power steering, 6 cylinder mustang is just as good as Strut, coil spring,rack and pinion,disc brake crown vic? If you are then why does everyone keep upgrading their cars with the stuff? You were the GM of a company specializing in this very thing? And you are telling me the stock stuff is better? Not global west's improvements...stock compared to stock. That sounds like a hard row to hoe and a bit hipocritical if I am to be honest. Feel free to argue the fringes of what ford designed, how it can be upgraded with this or that to be as good or better.

Ya'll are dodging the question to pick an argument about something that you know something about and it has no bearing on the original question. So lets get back to that. Feel free to argue amongst yourselves but if you don't know then just say you don't know and leave it at that. Better yet, nothing works just as well.

Will it work or not?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
240 Posts
I would say since no one is answering the question you already have your answer.

Apparently no has done this swap and if they have they're not talking about it.

Wish I could help you with your question. It's an interesting concept.

I drove a 1962 Falcon everyday for almost 20 years and I like the way classic cars handle, but that's just me.

I don't want a classic car to drive like a modern car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Thanks for that.

I have researched it religiously for days on end now and can't find even one reference to anyone attempting it on a car. It has been done time and time again on a ford truck.

I am with you, I like my classics to drive like a classic. This car on the other hand was purchased with the sole intention to make it into a mild autocross car. Mild in as I plan to leave the stock inline 6 with a few mods in places. More so to improve fuel mileage and have a nice handling driveable autocross classic mustang. The suspension is the first thing being adressed with the car as this is the most important part for handling a road course.

The 65 and 69 that I have are restorations. This one was purchased to play with:pirate:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,763 Posts
that is similar to an m2 suspension. how much modifying will it require to fit a mustang ? there are similar m2 kits that have ben on the market for years that weld right on the mustang and come with everyhting you need. your making way more work and possible expense with the cv suspension. are the ford truck frame rails the same distance apart as the mustang ? these are things you need to know.

btw that cv(crown vic) suspension is a double unequal lenght a-arm setup. it is not a strut suspension.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,602 Posts
Are you making an implication that a stock drum brake,power steering, 6 cylinder mustang is just as good as Strut, coil spring,rack and pinion,disc brake crown vic? If you are then why does everyone keep upgrading their cars with the stuff? You were the GM of a company specializing in this very thing? And you are telling me the stock stuff is better? Not global west's improvements...stock compared to stock. That sounds like a hard row to hoe and a bit hipocritical if I am to be honest. Feel free to argue the fringes of what ford designed, how it can be upgraded with this or that to be as good or better.

Ya'll are dodging the question to pick an argument about something that you know something about and it has no bearing on the original question. So lets get back to that. Feel free to argue amongst yourselves but if you don't know then just say you don't know and leave it at that. Better yet, nothing works just as well.

Will it work or not?
First of all, the crown vic is not a Mcpherson strut vehicle. I'm looking at photos of
both upper and lower arms right now.
Secondly, you "threw down the gauntlet" so to speak-
("As far as the crown vic front suspension having a small gain over a mustang. That is riduculous. The 2000 crown vic front suspension is superior in every way to a stock mustang. It isn't even comparing apples to apples")

And yes, I was the GM at Global West back in the mid-90's. I have the second car
they ever built and have been friends with the owner for 25 years. I've been in the
automotive aftermarket roughly 35 years and in the suspension/brake business about
17.

I merely asked for the upper & lower & knuckle lengths to look and see how vastly
better the crown vic set up is.....

Shelby (and others) raced very competitively with that Falcon-based stuff that
everybody thinks can be so readily improved upon. With the upper arm dropped
1", the positive camber gain was nearly zeroed out. It was a significant change.
Make the upper arm around 3/8" shorter and you've got a really nice camber
curve.....
The first factory car to have a positive camber gain front end was the original
Miata. GW did the suspension tuning on that car in prototype form.
I'm doubting the crown vic is optimized for good camber gain. The police cars
use different arms, they might be improved lengths, but I'm thinking it's mainly
arm strength, bushings and upgraded ball joints. I'm also guessing you can't
move a control arm pickup point 1" on the crown vic and vastly improve things.

So unless there's a big reason or huge improvement in using those cv parts
on an early Mustang..... that's why it hasn't been done.

ex-Global West GM
1991-1995
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34,283 Posts
I agree. This isn't my first rodeo with early mustangs. The cost to get the front suspension and disc brakes up to par with a late model car is signifigant. No doubt about that. If this works it will replace the entire suspension, steering and brakes in one fell swoop. No idea if it will or won't mind you, just thinking creatively. These things are in every salvage yard in the country and can be had very cheaply.
???

I've owned a "Crown Vic"....well, it was a 2000 Grand Marquis LS, same thing only rear sway bar, load-sensing rear suspension, etc. The cost to upgrade my '66 2+2's front suspension and brakes up to par with this car were MINIMAL. The Arning drop was pretty much all that was needed. The Crown Vic/Grand Marquis front suspension isn't anything to write home about. The upper ball joints wear prematurely due to poor design, the brake rotors are too thin and fade under high heat, and I always thought the steering geometry had too much toe out on turns.

I can't see where trying to graft a suspension from another vehicle, with different geometry, onto anything other than maybe a street rod, is a benefit.

PS: I've driven plenty of "late model" cars, including SN95's and don't feel that my '66 is inferior to them in handling or braking. Quite a bit inferior in interior noise, occupant safety and ergonomics, but a Crown Vic suspension ain't gonna' fix that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Discussion Starter #16 (Edited)
Once again. Thanks for your opinions. Having driven many police interceptor CV's, I can say they handle quite well at speed exceeding 140 mph.

Here are the brass tacks of it. My 66 has worn out drum brakes, worn out power steering, worn out suspension parts and it's 4 lug, not 5.

I plan to upgrade all of this at signifigant cost. If this swap will work it will handle all of the major upgrades in one chunk. At considerably less cost.Will it be a perfect scenario? I have no idea, that is why I asked the question.

Like many ideas that I have I guess, this is one more that I will have to just do. Give it a go and see.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,763 Posts
back in the 70's i use to take my 65-66 mustangs throught the sweeping turns on i-55 late at night in excess of 140 with goodyear polyglass gt tires and uca lowered an inch. did great. heres a foto of one of my 66's i did that in. i'm the fro on the left. had a 1" bar, 620 lbin springs. extra leaf added to the rear. thats all.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
Is the Crown Vic wheelbase the same as the Mustang? If not then don't do it.

It may make the car unsafe in some unforseen way you won't find out until too late.

In OZ we have to get everything documented and signed off by an engineer every time we make a significant change to a road regestered car. Can you get an engineer to take a look at what you are trying to do?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,763 Posts
Is the Crown Vic wheelbase the same as the Mustang? If not then don't do it.

It may make the car unsafe in some unforseen way you won't find out until too late.

In OZ we have to get everything documented and signed off by an engineer every time we make a significant change to a road regestered car. Can you get an engineer to take a look at what you are trying to do?
getting an engineer to look at it will require thousands of dollars and the item destroyed at the end. its not that simple , i know. i have delt with engineers on construction jobs where i designed some structural items. the owner of the vehilce is responsible for its safe operation here in the u.s. also the only thing the wheel base difference will affect is the akerman. i dont see where there would be a safety issue putting that front end under a mustang. btw lots of guys take old mustangs and chevys and put straight axles under the front and street drive them. if you can read a tape measure you can do a way better job then the factories +-1/8" tolerance. yep the tolerance on the old mustangs was 1/4".

i have never heard of a wreck occuring becaue of a suspension kit or modification. there have ben some factory recals in the last few years because steering shafts, steering u-joints, have failed. about a week ago it was reported that 5 ford f series pickup trucks had the steering box FAIL causing loss of control. the gov is investigating
 
1 - 20 of 59 Posts
Top