Maximum Motorsports k member issues? Wheels sticking out???

EPIK

EPIK

Member
Jul 3, 2004
796
2
16
LEFT COAST
#1
I installed my Maximum Motorsports K member setup on my Mach yesterday & it made my front wheels stick out past the fender??? MM says that there wont be any increase in track width, but my wheels are clearly sticking out at least 1/4" to 1/2" past the fender. I still need to get the K member perfectly squared, which i will be doing before I drive it anymore, but I could clearly see that squaring the K member wont alleviate the issue. BTW, my wheels are 18X9 FR500's with a 24mm offset. I will admit that i do have my car lower than is recommended, but it still handles & rides great imo, & usually the lower the car is, the more the wheels tuck in from my experience. At least thats the way it was with the factory K member....

Has anyone else had this issue with their MM k member? One plan I have is to try out some 94/95 spindles since they have a 1/4" narrower track width per side than 96-04 spindles. Do you guys think this will work & should I have any issues with this swap? I do have the correct bumpsteer kit & the control arms are in the upper mounting holes in the K member since my car is lowered around 2 inches or more.... Any info will be much appreciated...

On another note, my mechanic aligned it for the time being & the car handles awesome & it feels so much more solid than before. It also has alot less bumpsteer...

I would post up some pics, but it looks as if photobucket isn't working today??
 

  • Sponsors (?)


#5
Ok, well as much as I love MM's parts & excellent customer service, this is actually the 1st negative thing I can say about them. I spoke to them twice previously this week regarding this issue, & both times they said their K member should not widen the front track at all. They kept insisting it was installed improperly & that I need to line it up, which i do, but thats not the issue here. Well I called & spoke to Jason @ MM earlier today, & for some reason he looks up 94-04 K members in his computer & says that they DO widen the front track by 1/4" per side. He said the opposite the 2 previous times I spoke to him. He also said that its the 79-93 K members that dont change the width of the front track...


Like I said before, they have top notch parts & service, & they are extremely knowledgeable, but wouldnt you think they would know all the specifics about ALL the parts they sell, especially something as popular as their k members are???

Anyway, it looks as if my remedy is going to be getting 94/95 spindles since they are 1/4" narrower. This should hopefully fix the issue.

Even after this experience, I will still support MM fully though because they do make the best mustang suspension parts for street/track, hands down IMO, & my car now feels rock solid & handles like a go cart....It still has excellent ride quality for how low it is too....
 
#6
EPIK said:
Ok, well as much as I love MM's parts & excellent customer service, this is actually the 1st negative thing I can say about them. I spoke to them twice previously this week regarding this issue, & both times they said their K member should not widen the front track at all. They kept insisting it was installed improperly & that I need to line it up, which i do, but thats not the issue here. Well I called & spoke to Jason @ MM earlier today, & for some reason he looks up 94-04 K members in his computer & says that they DO widen the front track by 1/4" per side. He said the opposite the 2 previous times I spoke to him. He also said that its the 79-93 K members that dont change the width of the front track...
Click to expand...

IMO I would think the issue on their side would be some engineer designed it, some tech installs it, and some sales guy sells it - so there has to be something lost in translation heh. I find it funny that it took them that long to realize you were right all along, and weren't talking out your ass...maybe the best guys around might be getting a bit cocky? :p
 
#7
BennyBlown2v said:
IMO I would think the issue on their side would be some engineer designed it, some tech installs it, and some sales guy sells it - so there has to be something lost in translation heh. I find it funny that it took them that long to realize you were right all along, and weren't talking out your ass...maybe the best guys around might be getting a bit cocky? :p
Click to expand...

LOL...Tell me about it. I knew I was right. They most likely deal with more fox body parts than anything. I still think they are the best though & i will continue to use there parts....
 
#8
Do you think the increased wheel spread is a result of an analysis upon the higher CoG on an OHC SN95 versus an OHV SN95 or OHV Fox?

If they need a higher spread on the later SN95's, it could be because of increased height in the unsprung weight in the front end. Foxes and the earlier SN95s were pushrods, with lighter heads and less need for a wider stance.

When you throw unsprung weight to the attic, you have to build a wider, better foundation.
 
#9
timeless2 said:
Do you think the increased wheel spread is a result of an analysis upon the higher CoG on an OHC SN95 versus an OHV SN95 or OHV Fox?

If they need a higher spread on the later SN95's, it could be because of increased height in the unsprung weight in the front end. Foxes and the earlier SN95s were pushrods, with lighter heads and less need for a wider stance.

When you throw unsprung weight to the attic, you have to build a wider, better foundation.
Click to expand...

Could be true, but I am anal about how my car looks & there is no way in hell Im gonna drive around with the front wheels poking out of the fenders... They could at least say that in the instructions or on there site. I do tons of research before I buy parts & it didnt say anything anywhere about the MM K members widening the front track width...
 
#14
MM is in San Luis Obispo, CA.... Why dont you call MM and say "Hey, i live in Cali, if i drive my car to you can you fix the issue since you say it doesnt make the front track width wider?" :rolleyes:
 
#16
SVT32VDOHC said:
The 94-95 spindles will bring the wheels inward (inside the wheel well) 8mm. That coulde be an option. Another option is to look at www.americanmuscle.com They have 05+ offset FR500 wheels. They have a greater offset than your +24mm offsets do.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the info:D

It would be cool & easier if I could afford new wheels for the front, but Im just gonna go ahead & do the spindles....
 
#18
EPIK said:
Thanks for the info:D

It would be cool & easier if I could afford new wheels for the front, but Im just gonna go ahead & do the spindles....
Click to expand...

Anytime man. I have the 94-95 spindles on my 91 notchback and I have the 96-04 spindles on my 81 notchback. Everybody always said they would stick the 17X8 wheels out past the fenders, but they don't. They are still inside the fenders quite a ways. I had to get them out as far as I could because I have the 2001 rear axle in my 81 notch, with 05+ offset 17X9's ....so I had to match the way the wheels stuck out the best I could. That 8mm helped me out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
For Sale *NEW* Maximum Motorsports K Member and Strut Tower Brace
Replies
1
Views
339
Suspension Parts
ebone84
E
Andresquintana.mma
Engine Oil coming out of cai
Replies
16
Views
1K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
General karthief
General karthief
limp
Could my K Member be bent?
Replies
2
Views
848
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Mustang5L5
Mustang5L5
J
K member question
Replies
6
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
91TwighlightGT
91TwighlightGT
M
SOLD New Maximum Motorsports MMKM-1 K-Member SBF/79-95 Mustang
Replies
2
Views
1K
Suspension Parts
mx5tc
M
Top Bottom
Back
New
Hot
Menu