96+ spindles on a fox correctly

t76stang1Day · Mar 16, 2012

I've been searching around about the differences of 94-95 and 96+ spindles. I understand the differences of the track width and the tierod knuckles. problem is everything i search for people mostly say the big difference is the trackwidth. so sorry if im wasting thread space. Im not worried about the trackwidth. im worried about the bumpsteer.

I've been collecting my 5 lug parts the past few weeks. I found a pair of 96+ spindles locally and im grabbing them for $60. thats pretty dam cheap. I know on MM site they claim its not safe to use the spindles with stock fox k members which makes sense because the knuckles are different. they claim its too much of a difference to be corrected with a bumpsteer kit. I already have a bumpsteer kit from my previous setup. Now I was thinking about also using offset rack bushings combined with the bumpsteer kit to hopefully address that problem. Has any of you done this before, does it seem like it may work?

Boosted92LX · Mar 16, 2012

From what I've read, and I think there IS a sticky about it around here somewhere.. is that MM's claim is correct becuse in 96 the rack was relocated on the k member so far that it just won't work. You can do it with a 96 kmember...but you know.

Lemme see if I can find it..

t76stang1Day · Mar 16, 2012

yea i've read the MM tech part about these spindles heavily. I was just thinking/ hoping maybe the offset bushings would bring the rack closer to the knuckle so this this way it could be possible to fine tune it with the bumpsteer kit.

Boosted92LX · Mar 16, 2012

Here's what I found:

Here's the link to the thread as I'm sure there's a lot more there:
http://www.stangnet.com/mustang-for...5-lug-brake-conversion-upgrade-thread.801400/

And this is what I found at a glance:

Here is some info on front end (spindles) geometry differences over the years. Moderator Mike (Mustang5L5) actually came up with this info, so blame him, not me.

Maximum Motorsports said:

Do not install a 1996-04 spindle on a 1979-93 or 1994-95 Mustang fitted with a stock-geometry k-member!

Doing so will significantly increase bumpsteer because...

* The steering arm on the 1996-04 spindle is about 1.02" (26mm) lower (relative to the rest of the spindle) than the steering arm of any 1979-95 spindle.

* The lower steering arm forces the outer tie-rod end to a lower position.

* That new position is far too low for the steering rack location of any 1979-95 Mustang, and radically changes the steering geometry.

* It is impossible to correct the geometry with a bumpsteer kit because the outer tie-rod end needs to be raised so much that it would have to occupy the same physical space as the steering arm.

Having said that, there ARE people who get the '96+ spindles to work with the stock K member. I can't really add anything about that from personal experience, because I've never driven a Fox car with stock K member and '96+ spindles.

Also...

Maximum Motorsports said:

1994-95 spindles will increase the front track width by 0.120" (3.1mm) per side.

1996-04 spindles will increase the front track width by 0.320" (8.1mm) per side.

Visuals:

There is actually a lot more info in these links below. Besides, I'm sure MM will want you to check out their site, especially after I "borrowed" some of their info.

Mustang Spindle Install and Upgrade Warning : Maximum Motorsports, the Latemodel Mustang Performance Suspension Leader!

1979-93 Mustang: Swapping to the 1994-04 Spindles : Maximum Motorsports, the Latemodel Mustang Performance Suspension Leader!

NIKwoaC, owner of BLAKwoaC- One of those silly big head/small engine street cars. Re-ringed stock 302 bottom end, TEA Twisted Wedge 205s, CNC'd TFS R intake, 97mm MAF meter, very mild custom cam.

Full weight, granny shifting, 17" street tires: 13.10 @ 109.33 ee:
NikwoaC, Dec 8, 2010 Report
#36 Like Reply

93project · Mar 16, 2012

There is a difference in width but, I have 2002 spindles on my 93 and the 245/40 18 18x9 wheel tire combo sit perfectly up front. Right under the lip of the fender. I have the car lowered using B springs, I have offset rack bushings, 02 Moog ball joints, and 93 Moog outer tie rods. No bump steer issues at all.

t76stang1Day · Mar 16, 2012

93project, do those moog ball joints or steeda ball joints raise the spindle alittle higher? that could would probably help me out too.

btw my current FRONT setup consists of MM coilovers with sn95 a arms. and i will also be running the 96+ spindles

93project · Mar 16, 2012

They don't. Everything fits as it would with a 93 ball joint. If u used a fox ball joint, you'd need to use a spacer or washers to fit 94 up spindles

Shakerhood · Mar 17, 2012

I personally would not use them, saving a few bucks instead of doing it safely is not worth it.

hsean · Apr 11, 2012

bringing this back from the dead man i had 93 cobra R spindles on my car and decided to swap them out for 96 spindles because of the way the steeda bumpsteer kit fit.i wish i would have done a search before i did this any updates on a fix?i will probably swap them back out tomorrow.

LarsD · Apr 12, 2012

I remember doing a lot of reading on the subject before I did my 5 lug swap. From what I saw most people with 96+ spindles didn't have any problems with bump steer. I had a set of 97 spindles but went with the 95's I have now cause I wanted to be able to run 9" rims up front and I wasn't sure if they would fit properly with the 96+ spindles.

oatburner99 · Apr 15, 2012

the whole bumpsteer is bull...half the people that CLAIM they had excessive bumpsteer do not even know what it is. 3 different guys in our car club, have 96 spindles
'on their fox's (LX coupe, LX hatch and a GT) stock rack, new balljoints (parts house, with washer's used as spacer's.) I spent weeks, researching trying to find out they whole problem, and actually really didn't get anywhere....MM makes good stuff, but their disclaimer is setting you up for buying their k-member. WTF ever...

MFE92 · Apr 16, 2012

oatburner99 said:
the whole bumpsteer is bull****...half the people that CLAIM they had excessive bumpsteer do not even know what it is. 3 different guys in our car club, have 96 spindles
'on their fox's (LX coupe, LX hatch and a GT) stock rack, new balljoints (parts house, with washer's used as spacer's.) I spent weeks, researching trying to find out they whole problem, and actually really didn't get anywhere....MM makes good stuff, but their disclaimer is setting you up for buying their k-member. WTF ever...

Do us a favor, and explain what bumpsteer means to you, without using google.

oatburner99 · Apr 16, 2012

MFE92 said:
Do us a favor, and explain what bumpsteer means to you, without using google.

Bump steer is a change in toe of the wheels due to the result of the suspension (front and sometimes rear) loading and or unloading, which causes un-commanded steering and requiring steering correction.

CarMichael Angelo · Apr 16, 2012

I never considered using 96+ spindles because of the wider stance. But now after looking at the spindle, I'm thinking I may convert over to them. I LOWERED the rack on my stock K member to allow the 4.6 to sit where I wanted it to be, and now I have significant spacers below the 95 tie rod mount point to try and correct for that. So basically, I'm gonna add another .200" to the outside width then?
Probably be able to get rid of an inch of spacers
I have "acceptable" bumpsteer at 1 inch of compression now, ( about .050-.060) but I'll bet it gets pretty bad after that. If I get serious about making it corner, (more than just turning into the cruise-in parking lot) I'll definitely be changing it over.

hsean · Apr 16, 2012

i sold my new 96 and up spindles with brand new hubs yesterday here locally for 100 bucks, decided to go with the 93 cobra r spindles i had which are basically the same as 94-95.i have a stock k-member and didn't want any issues with it but i wasn't worried about the width either.

jdviper6 · Sep 26, 2016

Can I resurrect this thread from the dead? how does this affect a lowered mustang? shouldn't a lowered mustang automatically correct this by just being lowered?

Shouldn't a lowered car and the 96-up spindles be a good thing geometry wise?

HotFox · Sep 26, 2016

No its the opposite, a lowered car makes the geometry worse.

jdviper6 · Sep 26, 2016

Doing so will significantly increase bumpsteer because...

* The steering arm on the 1996-04 spindle is about 1.02" (26mm) lower (relative to the rest of the spindle) than the steering arm of any 1979-95 spindle.

On a lowered car this should even out, am I wrong on this?

stykthyn · Sep 26, 2016

If it was that simple I think this would have been debunked ages ago, but I'm far from an expert. I'm curious as well. I had a set of 96 spindles but sold them before I ever installed them.

mikestang63 · Sep 26, 2016

Iwould trust Jack and the rest of the tech team at MM over anything I read on message boards. They've been designing some of the best suspension parts for these cars for over 25years.

96+ spindles on a fox correctly

t76stang1Day

Member

Boosted92LX

It's only an inch or two. What's the big deal?

t76stang1Day

Member

Boosted92LX

It's only an inch or two. What's the big deal?

93project

Active Member

t76stang1Day

Member

93project

Active Member

Shakerhood

hsean

LarsD

oatburner99

Active Member

MFE92

oatburner99

Active Member

CarMichael Angelo

my rearend will smell so minty fresh,

hsean

jdviper6

Member

HotFox

jdviper6

Member

stykthyn

I want to measure mine. It doesn't look that tall.

mikestang63

Similar threads

96+ spindles on a fox correctly

Member

It's only an inch or two. What's the big deal?

Member

It's only an inch or two. What's the big deal?

Active Member

Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

my rearend will smell so minty fresh,

Member

Member

I want to measure mine. It doesn't look that tall.

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency