Vintage Mustang Forums banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,379 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
So...I am getting ready to replace my floorpans using full-length patch panels and happened to run across these:

65-66 Mustang CNC Cut Floor Contoured Frame Connectors

I dont think I have ever actually seen contoured connectors before...they are appealing because they tie into the floorpans strengthening the unibody that much more. What do you guys think? I am building the car with the intention of being able to handle more than straight line acceleration...so while the acceleration help isnt too relevant to my build...the braking help subframe connectors would add would help...and since these tie into the actual unibody...maybe they will resist chasis flex as well? So far I have added torque boxes(its a 66 couple) and plan on adding a rear seat divider stiffening panel, but am stopping short of an actual roll cage(its still a street car/daily driver)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,379 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I wouldn't waste my time. If the floor is coming out, I would do this...http://streetortrack.com/Installing-convertible-rockers-into-a-65-68-p-14.html

Oh wait, I did.
As nice as that would be...considering torque boxes are already in place, I don't see it happening(no way I am taking them back out now). I dont think its possible to install those rockers after the fact...so subframe connectors seem to be my only viable choice...possibly with some sort of cross bracing to tie into the rocker...so any suggestions are appreciated that take into consideration torque boxes are in to stay.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
314 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,379 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
The ones you posted look nice/blend well, but don't look very strong. I really like the global west subframe connectors. The optional rocker brace kit looks nicely made too.

1964, 1965, 1966 Mustang Subframe Connector Global West Suspension
Well...12 gauge steel is 1/8" or .125...which is the same thickness as the global west connectors...so the strength is likely close to the same(well, in reality, not really since global west is DOM tubing after all). The only reasons I think the global west connectors may still be significantly better is the open-top of these ones...since they rely on the thin sheetmetal of the floor to make up the 4th side....and the fact that you lose a little more ground clearance with these vs the global west variety(on a guess, about 1/2")...however, you could potentially overcome this by boxing in a top from 12 gauge steel before ever installing them easily enough. The rocker panel "jacking rail" tie in that global west offers could easily enough be duplicated with some 1" square tubing and tie into any subframe connector really(and easier if the connector in question is not round). The real question between the 2 then becomes...is the extra unibody tie in offered by contoured connectors welded to the pans worth all the extra hassle? At the very least it would certainly make for more solid floors(not that they feel particularly weak anyway).

I dont know...I like the global west rear tie in point better...I am just trying to figure out the best option...hopefully before I install the floor pans(currently taking the old ones out). The convertible rockers would certainly have expanded options...but too late for that now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,603 Posts
Torsional rigidity is the name of the game. Round tubing resists
twist better than square designs.
There's some truth to the statements provided on US Car Tool's site,
they just don't tell the complete story.


ex-Global West GM
1991-1995
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,379 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Absolutely round tubing does resist twist better...round tubing is generally stronger too...this is true. The only real reason US car tool's connectors are even in the running is that they tie into the unibody along the entire length instead of just 2 points(your connectors have a much better rear tie in) it's true the floor doesnt give much extra strength...but there are some areas where it seems it could help. Forgive the example...but a ladder with no rungs will twist a lot easier than a ladder with even flimsy rungs
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,276 Posts
So...I am getting ready to replace my floorpans using full-length patch panels and happened to run across these:

65-66 Mustang CNC Cut Floor Contoured Frame Connectors

I dont think I have ever actually seen contoured connectors before...they are appealing because they tie into the floorpans strengthening the unibody that much more. What do you guys think? I am building the car with the intention of being able to handle more than straight line acceleration...so while the acceleration help isnt too relevant to my build...the braking help subframe connectors would add would help...and since these tie into the actual unibody...maybe they will resist chasis flex as well? So far I have added torque boxes(its a 66 couple) and plan on adding a rear seat divider stiffening panel, but am stopping short of an actual roll cage(its still a street car/daily driver)
I like the look of them myself. I went with Spintechs and they really look factory and very strong, they did take a little massaging. I believe these might have been in the running though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,603 Posts
Absolutely round tubing does resist twist better...round tubing is generally stronger too...this is true. The only real reason US car tool's connectors are even in the running is that they tie into the unibody along the entire length instead of just 2 points(your connectors have a much better rear tie in) it's true the floor doesnt give much extra strength...but there are some areas where it seems it could help. Forgive the example...but a ladder with no rungs will twist a lot easier than a ladder with even flimsy rungs
Use a 923 too.....

1964, 1965, 1966 Mustang coupe and fastback Rocker Rail Support Kit part# 923


ex-Global West GM
1991-1995
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,649 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,649 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,379 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Hmm, this conversation has helped immensely. Here is what I think I am going to do. The Global West tubing is superior in strength...it just doesnt tie in all along the length...with these other contoured connectors being inferior in strength but they do tie in.....since I am talking about boxing them in on top prior to install....I might as well combine the two ideas and take some 12 gauge sheet steel, countour it to the floor pan myself and weld it to the sides of some global west connectors....creating a double box design retaining the strength of the DOM tubing, maintaining the greater ground clearance of the Global West design, and tying in along the entire length of the floor pan...sure its slightly more expensive than either option, but uses the advantages of both connectors....and adding a flat side to the GW connectors also makes a tie-in to the rocker panel itself easier(I dont have a tubing notcher)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,194 Posts
Sounds like a plausible plan. My limited experience says ANYTHING you install by way of subframe connectors, welded in, is an improvement. Mine are generic "ABCD Mustang and Convenience Store" brand from years ago and it is a marked improvement in stiffness that you can feel instantly. Post pics if you go the route you described. Will be interesting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,379 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
Well, the Goobal west connectors are on the way...will likely buy the others as well and cut them up since the cost of flat stock is going to cost just as much.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,756 Posts
Torsional rigidity is the name of the game. Round tubing resists
twist better than square designs.
There's some truth to the statements provided on US Car Tool's site,
they just don't tell the complete story.
Nor does saying using tubing tell the whole story. :wink:

The one the OP is looking at is similar to the method of boxing a chassis or unibody which is common in production car to race car conversions. I've got a different vehicle on stands now that's in the process of boxing. That said one has to look at the assembly as a whole to gauge the structural integrity of the parts for the application. The integrity of any assembly is the sum of the design, engineering and material. I don't doubt the tube assemblies do well but it's still tied into the existing rails and transferring the stress there. Which is where your 923 would come in.


A few thoughts in general...
A first gen Mustang doesn't have subframes in the true sense. There are some cool after market kits or hacks from other cars you can integrate as a subframe. Still though adding runners, braces or the like as shown in the thread will make a difference. Stock running a stock powertrain the cars still have a fair amount of flex. Unless the OP is going to drive it full race duty cycle the kit he's looking at will help. For some corner carving and cruising it should be fine as long as the workmanship is up to snuff.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
For reference, here is shot of the Global Wests installed on my 70. These, along with the Mustangs to Fear front frame rail supports def stiffened up the car. Stock was like driving Gumby down the road and now it feels as rigid as a race car. My 2 cents would be, if you prefer the look of the boxed rails which resemble a full frame, then just know you may not be getting the full benefit. Other than that, if you are looking to stiffen up the car, the GWs are def the way to go.

*Sorry the message board turns portrait layout sideways.
 

Attachments

1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top