66 upper and lower control arms in a 70

[Opentracker]

Which of the 3 spots is the original one for the spring perches? I'm really curious what the effects would be... perhaps a smoother vertical compression of the shock through suspension movement?

The rear most spot is the stock location. The closer to the ball joint you go, the better motion ratio you get and the better the car drives (each spot is 3/4" apart with a total of 1 1/2" of movement). Two things a Coil over gives you is a better motion ratio, since they mount it on the lower arm close to the lower ball joint, and no binding from the stock type spring perch. What I hear from the CO crowd is they like the quick moving suspension you get and a better feel from the improved motion ratio. I'm not sure what this will do since I have never seen it before but it looks good so far. Something has to be better than paying 1.5K for a smoother ride from a CO - ouch! These arms are going on my '65 Ranchero project and it won't be on the road for a while still. I may need someone to test a set for me before then .

This mod would help someone who runs thier track car with different track conditions. Using the same spring and shock, the stock location would ride the smoothest and as you move it twards the ball joint it would stiffen up. On a street/track car you could run a 540 spring with a cheaper adjustable shock in the stock location, then move it into one of the other holes for track day. It may change the ride height also, that's one unknown at this point, and if so, how much? Look at a coil over spring, it's way smaller than the ones we use. The way they can do that is with a better motion ratio. To be able to use a cheaper spring and shock, and to get a better ride was the idea behind this mod. Also to have a smooth riding car on the street and be able to increase the spring and shock rate without swaping in new parts. I'm always thinking about the time and dollars it takes to run the cars on the street and track. I think this will help and it's easy to do. Moving the spring perch could be done in a few minutes rather than hours to swap in new springs and shocks.

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

Durring my research I found that the upper arms are about the same length from the center of the shaft kit to the center of the ball joint, news to me! (the 67 and up arms are wider only). The lower arm is longer on the 67 and up cars, hence the cars shock towers are wider appart to fit a bigger motor. Swaping in new shock towers and fitting new suspension pieces in would be more work than re-doing a set of arms. Since a 351C will bolt right in, I'm not going to take that rout. Nick (Dodgestang) has a 408 Cleveland in his car, that's plenty of power for our cars IMO. We have a Cleveland in our '65 coup and it is plenty fast for the street. It could use a bit more power and RPM for the track.


John