Broken shock tower options

[swhite832]

Hello all.

My wife has a 1969 convertible. It has rust. More than it should for what I paid for it, but oh well. I recently hit the brakes hard to avoid a deer and broke a shock tower.

Here is what has to happen regardless of which direction I go;
The engine and anything else will get pulled to access the tower(driver side). There are other rust spots I am aware of and will address those at that time. I have wanted to put a rack and pinion system in this car since we have owned it. There in lies the problem.
Do I;
1. Replace the shock tower(s) and go with after market rack and pinion, a-arms, springs etc.
Or,
2. Cut out both shock towers. Yank all the suspension. Replace it with a complete TCI or similar set up with new shocks, springs A-arms, cross member, etc etc.(it already has disc brakes).

I am capable of the job and have the resources to do it either way. It is not a numbers matching numbers car or a garage queen. It gets driven....sometimes hard.

Remember at least one Shock tower HAS to come out

Any advice????

 

[Wicked65]

100% do a mustang II style front end. I cant believe i wasted a couple grand keeping the shock towers the first time. Saves space, which isnt near as bad on those cars as the 65's. And sets everything up better. I used Rod and Custom, and highly recommend them. Id also look into a sub frame connector of some kind. Cant hurt since it is a convertable.

 

[mtaqua]

wish I would have gotten rid of the tower, to far in now to go back. Would have probably been the same or cheaper to do MII

 

[bikefreak600]

how well do the MII setups handle? i mean compaired to say a tubular arm setup w/ bearing rod ends + coilovers ? something similar to ron morris/tcp front setup ?

 

[mtaqua]

I'd give up a little handling for the room. Mine's setup for drag racing, OT roller LCA, MM adjustable strut rods, Strange coil over, and TCP uppers. I will say it handles nicer on the road than when I had the moog springs, OT uppers, and calvert shocks. Hopefully make it to the track this weekend.

 

[65wildstang]

It diffently handles better than the stock setup. I could tell a huge difference. I also done a power rack due to I was building a cruiser and possibly a few trips to the strip every now & then. You will gain alot of room,which will make your engine possibilties endless now or later on down the road. I've seen alot of people on different forum sites bash the MII setup, but the R&D that goes into these new setups are way more advanced than compared to 74-78 that there comparing them to.

 

[Fstbk]

The loads the suspension sees in a serious depression in the road, like at the bottom of a hill that starts going back up again, would be immense and these modified cars often have zero structure to transfer the loads properly, I cant imagine how much stress is sent to the frame at the tow board area.. Not to mention the limited suspension travel.

I would rather do a RSS style suspension.

 

[swhite832]

"would be immense and these modified cars often have zero structure to transfer the loads properly"

How so? If you were to manufacture an export brace to fit what difference would you have in load sharing?

 

[Wicked65]

Always goes back to the people that think with no shock towers, the car is just ganna fall apart.. After cutting mine out, ill tell you that if your thinking its the towers holding that front end up, your wrong. All the spot welds go right to the front frame rail. (yes I know, the towers are attached to the inner fender as well..) Its the rail carrying the weight, not the towers. I would say if anything, the inner fenders "Might" help with side to side flex. Might..
My Rod and custom setup is a very solid good piece. I have no confidence issues with it at all. And when my new setup goes in this next month, ill be putting down somwhere in the neighborhood of 700rwhp. If anyone here will have issues, id say it will be me..lol

 

[Fstbk]

"would be immense and these modified cars often have zero structure to transfer the loads properly"

How so? If you were to manufacture an export brace to fit what difference would you have in load sharing?

The original car sent the load from the top of the tower and aprons into the cowl, then into the roof/unibody structure.

If you were to actually make an export brace, what would you mount it to? The aprons are thin sheet metal that will not support anything on there own.

If you think the frame and lower part of the car can handle all of the loads these cars "Could" see then you may want to rethink things.

I am no expert, but I have cut apart a mustang or two.

 

[Fstbk]

Always goes back to the people that think with no shock towers, the car is just ganna fall apart.. After cutting mine out, ill tell you that if your thinking its the towers holding that front end up, your wrong. All the spot welds go right to the front frame rail. (yes I know, the towers are attached to the inner fender as well..) Its the rail carrying the weight, not the towers. I would say if anything, the inner fenders "Might" help with side to side flex. Might..
My Rod and custom setup is a very solid good piece. I have no confidence issues with it at all. And when my new setup goes in this next month, ill be putting down somwhere in the neighborhood of 700rwhp. If anyone here will have issues, id say it will be me..lol

So, you are saying that when the front suspension compresses hard the load is sent into the fire wall via the rear apron?

I am not saying they dont function, but I am saying that if you were at a road course with a hard gravity cavity, or on a country road with a serious elevation change that your car will be seeing loads placed at points that were never intended to see such loads. Its not rocket science.

 

[Wicked65]

Towers are attached to the frame. Springs push up on the towers. Towers, try and move up, but cant, because they are attached to the frame..
Mustang II.. Crossmember/suspension is mounted to the frame. Might be in a different way, but still attached at the same point. The location that is now reinforced is the same point that the load was held with the towers. I have read the pages and pages on this back and forth. And after doing it, i came up with the same conclution as i always did. If it was such a bad design (and im sure there are a couple of companies tha make a crap product) Why do so many people have the MII suspension, and never have any issues with it. Yes there are rumors of failing this and that, but who knows the actual cause. Piss poor welds, bad this poor install that..

Wouldnt there be such a bad rep about the MII front ends that no one would even chance going with one? Let alone want the liability of producing a product that was either dangerous or didnt function as advertised?

I should also say a couple other things about my setup though.. to be fair. I have through floor subframe connectors that are welded to the floor and front and rear "frame" aka box sheet metal.lol I have a 10pt cage with x brace. I have two support bars welded from the fire wall to the front of the frame rail ahead of the wheels. I can literally jack from behind my front wheel and lift the entire side of the car. So chassis stiffness is the least of my concerns.

 

[Fstbk]

I think you are confusing the front suspension compressing with the entire car compressing... put 400 pounds in each of the front seats and that comes close to an extra G of compression that the car would see in an aggressive posture in the bottom of a hill at speed with two adult in the car..
Sure, the suspension will work fine when you push down on top of where the hock tower was, but thats not where all of the load is in the real world.

IF you build the car for this suspension you are on the ball, but for the new guy that thinks this is the way to go all by itself, I feel thats another deal entirely.

 

[ihadagt500]

I have done an R&C as well as a RRS strut system. Both cars were 66 coupes, both were mild 302's with t5's. Obviously the RRS was the easiest to install, and since it was a small block, I had no need to modify the towers, although they can be cut back considerably. In my opinion the RRS system was hands down the better driving/handling system. I would presume that since the engine sits farther ahead and is slightly higher with the MII system that would have some effect on handling. A unibody car is designed so that all it's components work together. When you cut out part of it and add in something designed for another unibody, you open up a can of worms, namely ride height, suspension travel and general driveability. No, it isn't going to fall apart, it just won't ride or handle as well as we would like. If your into straight line stuff and physically wide engines, then use it. When guys first started using it 30 odd years ago it seemed like a good idea, but today there are better systems without cutting up your car

 

[swhite832]

.....but today there are better systems without cutting up your car

That's just it. I have to cut it up. At least one shock tower needs to be cut out. The other one is guilty by association. Truth is it seems easier to not replace them with original equipment. Cost wise I believe it will be close to a wash. Rack and pinion with all the other possible suspenion upgrades are going back in.
Im still on the fence.
Thanks for the discussion though. It helps