66 upper and lower control arms in a 70
- Thread starter mcode
- Start date
LMan
Founding Member
what sort of effect on handling do you think putting on completely different-length suspension parts will have on your car?
68rustang
Active Member
The upper arms are the same, I think, except for the bolt center for the upper shaft. The lowers will bolt up just fine. However, without actually crunching numbers I think the shorter 65/66 lower arm will cause a nasty positive camber situation. Picture the front end with the tops of the tires leaning way out in relation to the bottom.
Opentracker
20+ Year Stangneter 
- Feb 4, 2004
- 516
- 0
- 16
mcode said:
No - they won't even bolt up. The upper arms are shorter on the '66 and the bolt location is closer (3 3/4" VS 4 3/4"). The lower arm won't work either, way too short and the bolt holes for the strut rod are not the same. The strut rods are shorter on a '66 and the bolt holes are different there too. The spring perch is the only part that is the same.
John
4MuscleMachines
Member
hmmmm, just wondering out loud here John. say you put the correct UCA shaft in a 65/66 upper arm and bolted it in a 69 would that then net you something along the lines of the GW uca? without the revised ball joint angle of course but then we could wedge cut the arm to compensate for that.
so would it work, ya think? i'm betting we would have to build a spacer like GW uses. i'm just wondering if the shorter arm would improve camber gain much like the GW arm is upposed to. any thoughts?
how much shorter is a 65/66 uca than a 67-70?
so would it work, ya think? i'm betting we would have to build a spacer like GW uses. i'm just wondering if the shorter arm would improve camber gain much like the GW arm is upposed to. any thoughts?
how much shorter is a 65/66 uca than a 67-70?
Opentracker
20+ Year Stangneter
- Feb 4, 2004
- 516
- 0
- 16
bnickel said:
Well, I'm always up for checking into something new so I did some research. The issue would be the shaft kit. It's wider on 67 and up cars by 1'' and that would stop you from bolting it in a early car because of the shock tower shape. The early arms would not bolt into a later car even if you tried to drill new holes because of the shock tower shape. With the width of the arms, you would never get a 67 type shaft kit into an early arm and visa-versa. Good idea if it would work. Any way to save $599 is worth checking out but this one is dead in the water in my opinion.
On the same note. You can't make either arm much shorter or the car will not take an alignment. The arms I re-work are 5/16" shorter than stock. The GW arms are 3/8" shorter than stock. Any more than that and you run out of room to work with as far as the alignments go, even with a vario-camber lower arm kit. A shorter upper arm is the ticket but it has to be within reason. Too much camber change/curve isn't good either. A balance has to be met to get the car to drive well and still have a good footprint under braking.
John
Opentracker
20+ Year Stangneter
- Feb 4, 2004
- 516
- 0
- 16
My upper arm mod post got lost a while back. I'll be doing another one but I thought this might be a good thread to put up a sneek photo of my adjustable upper arm. This photo will only be up for a few days. I ran out of room on my server.
John
DarkBuddha
Founding Member
Hey John, I excited to see these new arms... I'll add this thread to my webpage list tonight. BTW, if you run out of space on your server, consider using something like ImageShack (which is what I use these days). It's totally free and no bs annoying pop-ups or anything. One tip though... if you do decide to register, keep your original email and link because ImageShack doesn't have a log-in process and doesn't keep track of where the heck you put your stuff, so you've just got to make sure you always go in through your very own "MyImages" link. Bookmark it and it's no problem though (unless you clear your cookies and that's when you need your original activation email).
Opentracker
20+ Year Stangneter
- Feb 4, 2004
- 516
- 0
- 16
DarkBuddha said:
Cool! I have a ton of photos that I have no room for. Thank you again for putting up a bunch of my stuff on your site.
John
as always John, that's impressive. me like 
, me want 
, me no have no welder 
, me have no moneys . my paint job pretty much drained my budget. i've been trying to hold off doing any suspension work until i have a ll the pieces i need to get it done. i have most of the replacement stuff to put it all back together but the stuff that's on there isn't all that old and has very little mileage so i'm ont in a hurry to work on the suspension yet. my main goal at the moment is weatherstripping, engine compartment harness and a new vinyl top. then i have a few interior pieces to get and i should be good to go for a while. have you ever bitten off more than you can chew at one time and had to spit some out so you could swallow? that's kind of how i feel right now with the stang
, me want , me no have no welder , me have no moneys . my paint job pretty much drained my budget. i've been trying to hold off doing any suspension work until i have a ll the pieces i need to get it done. i have most of the replacement stuff to put it all back together but the stuff that's on there isn't all that old and has very little mileage so i'm ont in a hurry to work on the suspension yet. my main goal at the moment is weatherstripping, engine compartment harness and a new vinyl top. then i have a few interior pieces to get and i should be good to go for a while. have you ever bitten off more than you can chew at one time and had to spit some out so you could swallow? that's kind of how i feel right now with the stang
DarkBuddha
Founding Member
Glad to do it.Opentracker said:
I figure it's the least I can do since you've been so generous and forthcoming with your projects. And for anyone interested in a running list of John's threads from here on Stangnet, go here --> Opentracker's Stanget threads linksJohn, I was always under the impression that the upper arms on a 67 and later car were shorter since Ford moved the shock towers out while moving the lower mounts inward, necessitating the longer lower arm? the onluy way I could see using that later arms on an earlier (65-66) car would be to swap the towers as well. I have a set of 69 towers I was considering grafting into my other 66 coupe, when I get around to it 
tweet66 said:John, I was always under the impression that the upper arms on a 67 and later car were shorter since Ford moved the shock towers out while moving the lower mounts inward, necessitating the longer lower arm? the onluy way I could see using that later arms on an earlier (65-66) car would be to swap the towers as well. I have a set of 69 towers I was considering grafting into my other 66 coupe, when I get around to it
I don't know the answer to your question, but keep in mind that the 69/70 mustangs are a wider car than the 65/66.
Similar threads
