1978 mustang new member

429MII

Active Member
Mar 10, 2019
169
168
53
57
British columbia Canada
I need the torque for the nuts on the upper a-arm shaft on the outside of where the bushings are. So far no manual seems to give this measurement from what I can find. I could go by the generic torque for the size of bolt I guess but I thought there would be a figure for this since people do replace upper control arm bushings
 
  • Sponsors(?)


429MII

Active Member
Mar 10, 2019
169
168
53
57
British columbia Canada
Yeah I considered those too. Thanks to hot rodders, mustang II front suspension stuff is pretty reasonable. In hindsight for the price I should have just got tubular upper a arms instead of rebuilding the stockers, but too late now...
Considered the big brakes too, but they move the track width out and I didn't want to do that with the wheels I'm running.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Manoah and 2Blue2

429MII

Active Member
Mar 10, 2019
169
168
53
57
British columbia Canada
If you are doing the big brakes AND tubular arms I think you can buy the 5/8 narrow upper and lower arms to compensate for the rotor increasing track width.

My car has 11 x 2.5 " rear drums so I figured the 9" front brake should be more than adequate.. also since the net weight of my car will be less than stock, and distributed more to the rear.

I wanted the retro aluminum slot wheels in 14" on the front, so clearance became an issue for me as well. I believe you need at least15" wheels to clear the big brake callipers if i am not mistaken.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Manoah and 2Blue2

LILCBRA

10 Year Member
Dec 6, 2005
1,117
271
124
47
Marietta, Ga
I ended up cutting about 1-1/2 from mine, then had to remove the inner fender liners and "adjust" the body seam inside the well. :)
 

2Blue2

I partied with that dude!, um girl, um whatever...
Mar 5, 2019
782
412
73
52
Oahu
I've been imagining a Boss motif for your car.
I know its early for picking curtains and paint already but it could work.....

kc1211-118699_1@2x.jpg 1977-ford-maverick-gt-2-3.jpg
Sorry old school photo shop with scissors and tape....well you get the idea.
DSCF0318.JPG


Door line doesn't work good
 
  • Like
Reactions: Manoah

429MII

Active Member
Mar 10, 2019
169
168
53
57
British columbia Canada
I have a new dilemma. I can't decide whether to basically leave the body stock, or customize with chrome bumpers and different tail lights and front end treatment etc. I am torn between not messing with a pretty clean body, and also detracting from the engine and trans mods, or going the whole deal and modding it all. I have some pretty tasteful ideas in mind, but once i do it there is pretty much no return.

So
plan 1
is to leave the body stock except for fibreglass hood and mid tuck bumpers along with stock front and rear spoilers.

Plan 2
is to do the same as plan 1 but add 70 torino taillights, flatten the back panel and get rid of the licence plate recess, fill in the marker lights and replace with 69 camaro markers all around, section a rear bumper off a 67 camaro on the back and use a lower valence off a 70 maverick, Use a modified 74 nose piece and a sectioned 1965 mustang front bumper with a 70 maverick front valence and a modified 69 mustang front spoiler.

What is the opinions out there on body mods? am I cheapening the result? There is something to be said for the stock look carrying a lot of power aka Sudden Death,
Or, help the Mustang II with some areas of obvious improvement aka bumpers nose and taillights that scream for re=design.

thoughts?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Manoah and 2Blue2

LILCBRA

10 Year Member
Dec 6, 2005
1,117
271
124
47
Marietta, Ga
My personal opinion would be to go with plan A, but it would be interesting to see the mash up of plan B. I think Plan A will actually have more impact given what it's gonna have under the hood. Going all out with modifications can sometimes be a distraction. Again, it's all my personal opinion.... :)
 

2Blue2

I partied with that dude!, um girl, um whatever...
Mar 5, 2019
782
412
73
52
Oahu
bumpers nose and taillights that scream for re=design.
The era of first gen urethane bumpers and new safety standards were ugly.
The 73 mustang urethanes were good looking compared to the 74s
The Mutt2 still wasn't as bad as the Lambo bumpers

us-american-lamborghini-countach-with-bumper-5000-qv.jpg


i'm also plan A guy but some of the ideas you have mentioned really excite me.
Maverick valences? Heil ya what a neat idea.
Chrome bumpers, Camero or otherwise (Maverick again maybe)...need other chrome to help support the look.

Full Custom? or Street racer? Pick one not both.
This bodes r so rare out and about, that extensive mods will leave the bulk of the population asking 'what is it?'
I feel Stockish with 429 will have the highest resale value(not that it matters) and be slightly cooler.

Easy to get lost in the more and more mods, So many great ideas, but draw a line! Do a 1.0 with a possible 2.0 later.

Just Get it put together!
I want to see smoky burnouts!



Again, it's all my personal opinion.... :)
Me2
Its got to make you happy first.
 

429MII

Active Member
Mar 10, 2019
169
168
53
57
British columbia Canada
Good points. Probably why i haven't started cutting it up. I will stick to plan A for this build I think. If I wasn't doing extensive drivetrain mods I'm thinking plan B would be cool.
The Maverick front and rear valences and bumpers is one I've eyed up for a long time. I think they would work without too much trouble, and they are close in size. Also the maverick went through the era but started earlier so It went from small bumpers to battering rams too, so kind of makes me think the Mustang II if it had started life in say 1970, would have had the same evolution.
I don't really mind the mustang II back bumper so much as I kinda hate the front bumper, but i can reshape the originals with a mid tuck and a minor section to look better.

I also never liked the practice (as on the rear of the Mustang II) of eliminating a valence by making a bumper bigger. The rear of a MII looks unfinished when viewed straight on because of the lack of a rear valence. Makes it sort of pick-up truck architecture.

Also the side markers are just plain weird on a Mustang II. What were they thinking?? They don't even fit. Its like ..oh..we forgot to build markers for this thing..hey Joe, grab those huge-ass lincoln side markers and splice those on there that will do..
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2Blue2