Shelby A-arm Relocation and Lowering Questions
- Thread starter bad68coupe
- Start date
67FBack
New Member
I know this isn't the classifieds, but in tune with the discussion,
I have a set of promotorsports neg wedges that I am no longer using if anyone is interested in them.
I still have the steel plate that relocates the upper A-arm and ball joints on my car. Only thing I can sell are the wedges and the bolts with the modified nut/washers. I also have a set of 1" thick poly spring bushings that I don't need.
The drop was too much on my car with the Promotorsports drop and 1" Eibach progressive rate springs. Looked and handled good, but 17" 235 45s on a '66 rubbed and drug my headers.
I have a set of promotorsports neg wedges that I am no longer using if anyone is interested in them.
I still have the steel plate that relocates the upper A-arm and ball joints on my car. Only thing I can sell are the wedges and the bolts with the modified nut/washers. I also have a set of 1" thick poly spring bushings that I don't need.
The drop was too much on my car with the Promotorsports drop and 1" Eibach progressive rate springs. Looked and handled good, but 17" 235 45s on a '66 rubbed and drug my headers.
Opentracker
20+ Year Stangneter 
- Feb 4, 2004
- 516
- 0
- 16
You can run a 15" wheel with 4.5 backspacing if you trim/grind some off of the upper arm. The wheels hit the arm, not the ball joint. I ran 15X7 wheels on my car for a while that had 4.5" of backspacing. All I did was grind a bit off the nose of the upper arm. The original Ford upper arms gave more room than the aftermarket arms do. They have less of a lip on the front of the upper arm.
UPPER ARM PHOTO 1
This arm has had the nose cut off the ball joint dome and a brace added. You don't need to cut this much off to fit a 15" wheel with 4.5 backspacing. I'm using these arms for my next project that will run 15x8" wheel with 4.75" of backspacing.
UPPER ARM PHOTO 2
This photo showes that arm next to a regular arm without any mods to the ball joint dome.
The 16" - 17" and up wheels get very heavy, over 25lbs each, some are over 30lbs each for the big ones. The more rolling mass you have, the more brakes you need to stop it. I agree that they start to look like wagon wheels after you get past the 16" wheels.
John
UPPER ARM PHOTO 1
This arm has had the nose cut off the ball joint dome and a brace added. You don't need to cut this much off to fit a 15" wheel with 4.5 backspacing. I'm using these arms for my next project that will run 15x8" wheel with 4.75" of backspacing.
UPPER ARM PHOTO 2
This photo showes that arm next to a regular arm without any mods to the ball joint dome.
The 16" - 17" and up wheels get very heavy, over 25lbs each, some are over 30lbs each for the big ones. The more rolling mass you have, the more brakes you need to stop it. I agree that they start to look like wagon wheels after you get past the 16" wheels.
John
mdjay
Premium Sponsor
jmenke said:
I would use the neg wedge for the geometry improvements and ditch the prog rate springs. The neg wedge only drops it about 1/4-1/2"...
mdjay
Premium Sponsor
zookeeper
Founding Member
Opentracker, nice pics. I see it really isn't too much trouble to clearance the A-arm. But most 16x8's built for older Mustangs use a 4 1/2 backspace, which is only 1/8" more than my 15x7 shelby wheels. That means that there will be 7/8" more wheel to the outside than mine and I don't have that much room, so how does everyone claim to run 8's on the front that don't rub with no modifications?
Opentracker
20+ Year Stangneter
- Feb 4, 2004
- 516
- 0
- 16
mdjay said:Come on now John! Let's not get into this debate~
This is a matter of preference!
I'm all for the 17" look
That is a bad-ass looking car. I GIVE! - - Those wheels look killer!
Some of the SUV's with 24's do look a little funny to me. Just my opinion.
John
Attachments
mdjay
Premium Sponsor
zookeeper said:
Most are runnin 4.75" with TTII 17x8" and about 1 deg neg camber! Most are also rollin the fender lips...
Opentracker
20+ Year Stangneter
- Feb 4, 2004
- 516
- 0
- 16
zookeeper said:
Our '65 coup runs the 16X8 wheels with 4.5 backspacing on the track with a 225/50/16 tire. It has glass fenders and there is no lip at all. They do rub a little but not much. The cars I have seen with the 8" wheels do have some mods or they sit way high with a small tire and stiff springs.
Yeah that was with new springs. I After I change the heads to some Edelbrocks it should come up a bit more. I like the way it corners and looks but my headers drag on most speedbumps. I drove my friend's 70 with some 620s and it was a bit skittish on some of the bumps is why I went with the progressive springs. Not that I drive the car much but thus far I am really pleased.
Kevin
Kevin
mdjay
Premium Sponsor
mdjay
Premium Sponsor
Sicarius428 said:
Prog rate springs allow the car to roll and you'll push. A 600 rate spring on a big block made for your car would be a pretty good ride and you don't give up body roll.
PS I always recommend shory headers for a street driven car!
zookeeper
Founding Member
Ok, that's what I thought. Thanks for answering honestly, I really don't want the tires to rub at all, nor do I want to raise the car. I know some companies make 16x7's and I'll probably go with those when the time comes rather than hope rolling the lips is enough.Opentracker said:
OH, you had to go and role out Big-Mac didn’t yah. That is the one and only classic mustang that I thought looked good with 18”. However, my personal limit is 17 and I really want to go 16 because I like to see some tire on the rims.mdjay said:IMO It's the bling factor that can kill the look on an early model.
Ex Big-Mac did a nice job with 18's
Attachments
Honestly the car doesn't roll or plow that I noticed. I've taken it on a few good turns but I also put the 1 1/8th front sway and 7/8ths sway bar in the rear. The front end is still by no means spongy. Shorty headers really aren't an option for the 428... I wouldn't want to sacrifice the power that the long tubes give me anyways. hehe... not that its hurting for any.
Kevin
Kevin
Looks better like this...mdjay said:zoo - they have 17" 5 and 10 spokes with the correct backspacing.
It's been my experience that just the 1" s drop can cause a bind as well. So be careful with the process.
Dodge's wheel chart shows someone ran a 17x9 with a 5.5 bs in the front on a 67-68. That put's the offset in the same spot on as a 17x8 with a 4.5. Personally I would think you might run into problems with the UCA and/or the outer tie rod.
http://www.dodgestang.com/Tire Fitment Guide 67-8.pdf
Just found out 20's work...
Attachments
mdjay
Premium Sponsor
Sicarius428 said:
Hey if it works for you, that's what counts. Those sway bars are helping you!
There's a long time debate between the shorties and long tube. The dyno numbers are virtually the same with slightly different curves. In other words, you may gain a little in the middle and loose a little on the top. Little meaning 2 or 3 hp! When you're talking about 500hp, you've got room to play. Someone out there has gotta make shorties for the fe motors...
Similar threads
