steering linkage doesnt have anything to do with camber. it sounds like the shock towers are sagging. i highly recomend you purchase a scott drake export brace and monte carlo bar. if it dont fit which i bet it dont the shock towers will need to be pulled out. it doesnt take much of a sag to throw the camber way off.

 

Is the other side the same?

 

Get us a picture of your shock towers from the inside. If they are really allowing -5 degrees of camber, the shock towers could have pulled all the spot welds and be resting up against your headers. I recently had my shock towers fully welded as insurance against this ever happening (It also stiffens up the chassis). Unfortunately only adding an export brace or Monte-Carlo bar isn't going to do anything if your towers have started to separate. Be careful though, as the guy I had to it did it too far and I lost a bit of negative camber. Have a look at this article:

1967 Ford Mustang Alignment Correction - Car Craft Magazine

 

IFFF the center-to-center distance between the two bolt-holes that the left/right lower control arms bolt to, is correct per Ford's dimension....

And IFFF the inside-to-inside dimension across the engine compartment, to the surfaces where the upper control arm nuts tighten against is correct to Ford's dimension....

You have installed some incorrect parts or have something installed backwards, although I can't think of anything that could be backwards?? Maybe the upper ball joints rotated 180? Seems like their centerline is NOT in the middle of the rivet holes?


Did YOU remove the old stuff or did someone else?
Was it right with that stuff on?
Any shock tower/fender-apron/core-support/frame rails been replaced?

I'm stumped too.

 

I have never seen one that bad. are you sure the lower control arm is correct? How did it sit before you replaced the suspension?

 

+1

can you compare the new to the old

 

If you still have your old suspension parts I would compare them to your new ones. what spindles are you using? if your shock towers are not sagging and usually they are ok on 6cyl cars then either your upper control arm is to short or your lower arm is to long. Or you have a problem with your spindle. Are both sides like this?

 

I think Cmefly is right. I'd get a measurment from lower B/J to inner pivot point and compare to a known 66 LCA. I wouldn't put it past Laurel Mountain to ship you 68+ LCAs.

It could be shock tower sag, but that's a lot for a 6 cylinder car. Just the same, you shouls install the monte carlo/export brace as Super Shifter suggested.

 

I have exchanged several emails and a phone call with the OP and I am not stumped. I expressed my belief that he has 68 LCAs on the car. He states that the dimension from center of ball joint to the center of bushing is around 14". I measured this dimension on 2 of my 65-66 Mustangs at about 13".

I have confirmed that he has the correct part number for the CSRP 65-66 type spindle.

 

Also make sure you have the correct spindles...

 

Ok let's make sure everyone is measuring from the same place. Just checked the set I removed from my GT coupe and I got the same measurement as OP measuring on the bottom side to the zirk fitting. If I flip them over and measure the top side to the bolt from the ball joint it's more like 13". I haven't measured the UCA. I also measured the new set I have still in box and have the same measurement.

 

68-70 lca will not fit the 65-66 strut rod. i have ben told that 67 lca will fit but its about 2.5" longer and would really kick the bottom of the tire out.

 

67 LCA's 'could' fit, never tried it. They will bolt up and have the same 4 hole pattern for the strut rod allowing them to be used either side with a straight strut rod to LCA mounting plate/bracket. This can make them 'look' like 65-66 LCA's. The 67 LCA's are ~2" longer than the 65-66.

I would think though that if you had a 67 LCA with a 65-66 strut rod you'd also have a massive positive caster issue. The longer LCA and short strut rod would pull the BJ forward.

 

did you use any shims on upper control arms ?

 

He said he already has 7/8" of shims installed. Crazy to still have negative camber. It must have the wrong lower control arms.I would like to see some pics with the tire off. DIEHARD is your camber the same on both sides? And how was it before changing the suspension?

 

Negative Camber

Thanks Guys! I'm surprised the amount of responses and am glad I decided to post this.

Supershifter/Dudeof5/Stichy-The shock towers are good. This car only has low original miles and never wrecked to my knowledge. All of my other parts and body parts fit great. You can check the link and look at the pics and you will see its prestine.

Cmefly-I have the same issue on both sides. I am leaning towards incorrect control arms. I have pictures of the measurements and how they were pulled. LAurel Mountain is telling me they are measuring the same thing out of there kits, which is 14" for this year. Unfortunatelty I no longer have the old ones.

Rdlagray-Please look at the pics and see if your measuring the same, just confirming.

Theman/Degins(CSRP)-I purchsed the spindles from Degin at CSRP and have verified those part numbers. I feel confident that they are cxorrect and its a LCA issue no matter what LMM is telling me.

If everyone can please confirm the pictures and measurements I will order new LCA and see if we're right.

www.photobucket.com/1966stang - for general pics
www.photobucket.com/1966Stangproblems - for measurements and similar pics

Again thanks for the help!

 

LAurel Mountain is telling me they are measuring the same thing out of there kits, which is 14" for this year.

That is approx. the correct length for a 65-66 LCA. Measured from center of pivot to center of pivot.

 

The first link is my fastback that I am driving. The second link is the old one I pulled off the GT coupe and the third is the new one.
http://i954.photobucket.com/albums/ae28/rdlagray/5789c2d8.jpg
http://i954.photobucket.com/albums/ae28/rdlagray/db2eefe5.jpg
http://i954.photobucket.com/albums/ae28/rdlagray/10773c8e.jpg

 

I have my '65 LCAs out right now 'cause i'm heim jointing the small end. I just went in the garage an measured one and it's 14" from zerk to center of bushing and 12 1/8 from ball joint rivit center (closest rivet to the small end) to the center of the bushing

 

Okay so its definatley not the lower control arm giving me problems then if its supposed to measure 14". They currently measure 14" so that is correct. Anyone know the correct UCA length? And where are you measuring from? I was just about to order new LCA from Shaun so that saves me some time and headache but man this frustrating. Any other suggestions or measurements I can check?

 

How is it that different people can measure there same year cars and have two different measurements but still agree that we are measuring from the same place as the pics provided. Did they change parts mid-year? I've not heard of it but I'm out of ideas.

 

I just measured the distance between the shock towers to be approx. 24". Thats from UCA bolt-nut to nut. I don't think its my shock towers sagging but it never hurts to double check.

 

I just measured the distance between the shock towers to be approx. 24". Thats from UCA bolt-nut to nut. I don't think its my shock towers sagging but it never hurts to double check.

My car is the same and I have no sag and it has never been hit.

 

Well, we have ruled out the lower control arm as the problem. I doubt its the upper control arm it would have to be very short. That leaves only the spindle or your coil spring are way to low for the car. Is it lowered and if so how much? camber will go more negative as the car is lowered. But not 5 degrees. Do you have the original spindles? on a side note Degins measured his 65/66 lower arms at 13" but you only get that measurment if you measure the top of the control arm from center bushing to center of ball joint stud. it will measure 13 7/8" from the bottom side center bushing to the zerk. Do you have a printout of the alignment angles?

 

LMM sold me 1" drop springs which lowered it and made it shimmable but still doesn't work. The longer the spring the worse it gets. Long springs push down more on the UCA and inturn drops the LCA creating more Negative Camber. So as of now the LCA is correct and the shock towers are good. It only leaves the UCA right? UCA sizes anyone?

 

UCA sizes anyone?

All 65-73 UCA's measure the same in length. Its the bolt spacing on the shaft that separates 65-66 and 67-73.

 

66 Mustang too much negative camber - Ford Mustang Forums

This guy had the same problem

 

Have you checked the frame and pickup points via the frame diagram - http://www.nzmustang.com/TechData/64-65%20Mustang%20chassis%20spec.jpg

??

 

Is pic 14 in your album at ride height?

That is a pretty steep downward angle on the LCA. This is a pic of a 66 with 17" wheel and a 45 series tire, the LCA is almost level with the ground:

 

Shaun-Pic 14 is not ride height. I think I jacked it up to get that picture since I have the drop springs in. I think I will order some GT springs from ST tomorrow just becuase I want a better ride height. I just checked every measurement on that spec sheet and they are all within 1/4" or so.

 

Why dont you try these Opentracker Racing Products - Lower Control Arm Camber Kit

 

Why dont you try these Opentracker Racing Products - Lower Control Arm Camber Kit

That might help, you could also check out THE MUSTANG SHOP OF ARIZONA they have a lower arm that has a built in camber adjustment. this does not fix your problem it is more of a band aid. You still may have a problem with those spindles.

 

measure the shock tower distance from the c/l of the inboard bolts that hold the shock mount bracket to the top of the shock tower. if the engine is the car use 2 plumb bobs, a tube/bar and something on each side of the car to set the bar on.