Anyone with SN95 font suspension? 68?

Booksix · May 21, 2007

Anyone with SN95 front suspension? 68?

My dad just got back from World Ford Challenge in Indianapolis and said he saw a classic stang with sn95 suspension in front. He wants to use this on the 68 we're building rather than a MII kit.

I like the idea cause there are so many parts available (comes with r&p, big brakes bolt up, coilovers, tubular k-members, etc, etc...) but my question is would it be as easy and cost effective as dropping in an MII kit built for the car? So I guess the better question is, who's done it, how much did it cost you and how is the end result (as far as performance goes)? thanks!

1320stang · May 21, 2007

That kit is from AJE, saw it myself and talked with Anthony himself and was VERY impressed. I didn't see a car with one installed and Anthony didn't say anything about one being there with his kit installed. They did have the display mockup there, maybe that was what your dad saw.

This kit will work with road race or drag cars, just change the springs and strut cartridges. You can even have them put whatever drop you want on them. The kit has changed in the way that it mounts to the frame, it no longer captures the frame in the rear, it goes under like the front. The display doesn't have the motor mounts on there, they put those on and can place them wherever you want your engine at. He said about 3-4 people have called him and said they heard about it on StangNet and he's cheked the site out. I told him I'd put in a good word. He said there is no bumpsteer problems with his kit and it'll go in '64-'70 Mustangs, Falcons (I'm assuming '61-'65), Fairlanes (again, assuming '62-'65) & Mavricks (assuming all years).

BlackGMC · May 21, 2007

Are there any pics of the kit, I went to the website and all they had were prices...

MO351 · May 21, 2007

Link to website?

Booksix · May 21, 2007

Well, my biggest question is, can this be done without a "kit." Rather, I want to grab a sn95 donor car and use it's entire front suspension and k-member (maybe a tubular upgrade?) and graft it into my 68.... then use the entire drivetrain...

PJx5x · May 21, 2007

I too saw the setup AJE had and it was pretty nice. However I am leaning towards the DVS Restorations kit that modifies the frame rails to accept any SN95 suspension setup.

Booksix · May 21, 2007

That sounds pretty sweet, but I'm still wondering if it can be done without a kit and how you all think it would compare, complexity wise, to installing an MII kit...

bnickel · May 21, 2007

Booksix said:
That sounds pretty sweet, but I'm still wondering if it can be done without a kit and how you all think it would compare, complexity wise, to installing an MII kit...

no, it can't be done without a kit unless you are a very talented fabricator. personally, i don't like any of the aftermarket kits that do away with the shock towers and/or the factory suspension mounting points.

www.classicperform.com is coming out with a kit to replace the strut rods and lower control arms with an actual A-arm. look at their nova kits and you'll get an idea what the mustang kit will look like. they will also have tubular upper control arms as well and they asid pricing should be about the same as the nova kits. i'm seriously considering one of their lower kits for the 69 cougar i'm getting and using opentrackers roller perches and possibly upper control arms. i already have a TCP rack that i'll use on it as well. haven't decided what i'm going to do out back though.

88gt · May 21, 2007

Check out www.sn65.com

Only way I've seen it done.

rbohm · May 21, 2007

there have been mustangs and even an F100(a 56 i believe) that have used a fox body front suspension, so it can be done. the mustang i have seen it done on, the fox body K member actually fit the mustang frame rails rather well. almost like it was designed for it. if you choose to do this swap, i recommend using a tubular K member for the install as it is lighter than the stock K member. the upper shock/spring mount is easily modified to accept the top strut mount. by the way, i personally would use an aftermarket K member that allowed the use of stock fox body control arms, and keep the spring mounted in the stock fox body location. this works because the K member and not the factory frame rail is handling the suspension load. it also allows you to slim down the shock tower more than you could with a coil over strut conversion.

wicked93gs · May 21, 2007

this topic really interests me...seeing as how I would love to trim down my shock towers for more room for my engine and never trusted the mustang II system...but I would need to see some actual pictures before buying a k-member(though granetelli has one you can get for $650 with a-arms and coilover springs)

BB1966 · May 22, 2007

Why do people "not trust" the MII set up??? It has been in use for MANY years in almost every type of car/truck you can name. I have been installing a Heidts front and rear in my FB and it looks great and much nicer than notching the shock towers.

1320stang · May 22, 2007

Most vehicles it's used in aren't unibody. Yes, the MII was a unibody but it was designed for it. I'm going to be putting a MII front end on a friend's '54 F-100 and don't have any qualms about it. If you were doing a MII in a classic stang and were putting in a full cage with front bars, I'd still have no problem. If it doesn't have a cage and is a show car that only gets driven on and off a trailer and around the show grounds, probably not a problem. If it's a daily driver and gets 20k on it a year, I'm not riding with you, simple as that.

rbohm · May 22, 2007

the problem with the mustang ll swap is that it change the load path of the suspension from where the primary load is at the top of the suspension, where it was designed to go, to the lower frame rail which is too thin to handle the load long term. there are ways to reenforce the lower rail, but they are involved.

Rusty67 · May 22, 2007

Somehow I doubt changing to SN95 suspension instead of improving the stock suspension would give you better geometry. I suppose if you are doing a mod motor swap this might be a good idea but other wise I really don't see any point.

PJx5x · May 22, 2007

Rusty67 said:
Somehow I doubt changing to SN95 suspension instead of improving the stock suspension would give you better geometry. I suppose if you are doing a mod motor swap this might be a good idea but other wise I really don't see any point.

Rack and pinion. More available setups, including tubular. Newer and easier to find parts for. I see no reason not to.

wicked93gs · May 22, 2007

for me its an engine clearance issue...the engine I am swapping will have about 1/4" on each side...while not a mod motor its damn close and I'd like a bit more room for my headers/exhaust...that and I would like a coilover setup which it would give me at lower cost

rbohm · May 22, 2007

Rusty67 said:
Somehow I doubt changing to SN95 suspension instead of improving the stock suspension would give you better geometry. I suppose if you are doing a mod motor swap this might be a good idea but other wise I really don't see any point.

there are advantages to both systems,as well as disadvantages. assuming for the moment that both are easily installed, the later suspension has fewer bumpsteer problems than the earlier suspension, but the earlier suspension is going to be better in a racing application due to better overall geometry. the later suspension will have a better ride quality, and will be better in most other driving regimes. the differences however are slight, and a good driver can overcome minor differences.

1320stang · May 22, 2007

The AJE system does not use the SN95 geometry, the spindle is made at AJE to compensate for the ride height and the appropriate angle for the strut cartridge. It also has no bumpsteer as the lower control arm intersects with the rack perfectly.

BB1966 · May 22, 2007

The stock shock towers did support all the front end. The towers were not all that strong to start with as the were still welded to the same rails and light guage fender aprons. They had to have braces and bars to keep them apart, patches to keep them from cracking ect. After the stock rails are boxed and the tower holes filled I dont see the problem. 1320stang what proof/evidence do you have that this set up is unsafe???????????????????

Anyone with SN95 font suspension? 68?

Booksix

New Member

1320stang

BlackGMC

New Member

MO351

Booksix

New Member

PJx5x

Member

Booksix

New Member

bnickel

88gt

rbohm

wicked93gs

BB1966

New Member

1320stang

rbohm

Rusty67

PJx5x

Member

wicked93gs

rbohm

1320stang

BB1966

New Member

Similar threads

Anyone with SN95 font suspension? 68?

New Member

New Member

New Member

Member

New Member

New Member

Member

New Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency