• Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech

Subframe/frame rail replacement

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rusty67
  • Start date Start date Jun 28, 2009

Rusty67

20+ Year Stangneter
Dec 3, 2002
3,749
37
109
LA, CA
Jun 28, 2009
#1
  • Jun 28, 2009
  • #1
I need to replace both of the front frame rails on my 67. I am going to be puting in some full length subframe connectors and a cage in the rear only (no full cage). I am thinking of just replacing the frame rails with tublar stock and connecting them directly front to back. Do you guys think this would stiffen up the car more then replacing them with stock frame rails and running subframe connectors ?
 
2

2+2GT

10 Year Member
Apr 25, 2009
3,333
10
79
Southeastern Pennsylvania
Jun 28, 2009
#2
  • Jun 28, 2009
  • #2
Rusty67 said:
I need to replace both of the front frame rails on my 67. I am going to be puting in some full length subframe connectors and a cage in the rear only (no full cage). I am thinking of just replacing the frame rails with tublar stock and connecting them directly front to back. Do you guys think this would stiffen up the car more then replacing them with stock frame rails and running subframe connectors ?
Click to expand...

No, I don't. It would take a LOT of engineering to break even with a properly assembled stock front end, if assembled properly and reinforced with export brace and Monte Carlo bar.

This 68 GT350 had rotted front rails, and they were replaced with Dynacorn assemblies. The work was done one side at a time to preserve dimensional integrity. These assemblies will cost you $1500 for the pair, a lot less than custom framing would cost. They also feature the 68 1/2 Cobra Jet tower reinforcement, which actually had to be removed for this Shelby.

68 GT350 Restoration




If you really want to do some reinforcing, add convertible inner rockers to tie the rails together. Much stronger than aftermarket subframe connectors.
 

Rusty67

20+ Year Stangneter
Dec 3, 2002
3,749
37
109
LA, CA
Jun 28, 2009
#3
  • Jun 28, 2009
  • #3
I forgot to mention that there is no labor cost associated with this project, only materials cost.

I was going to replace my floor pans first and then move to the frame rails.

So you think it would be best to put in stock frame rails and then put in subframe connectors ?
 

65FBE2

Member
Mar 8, 2007
283
0
17
Minnasnowta
Jun 28, 2009
#4
  • Jun 28, 2009
  • #4
Ditto on the stock rebuild first. Then add in the inner rockers. There are a Couple other ways to go. Mustangs Plus makes a chassis strengthening kit which is close to the convertible reinforcement set up. works great and really stiffens the whole car. I used Miar Racing sub frame connector on my fastback. They are better than most out there because the weld in at two spots in the front and two spots in the rear so as to not create a fulcrum affect. They are also round which is stronger than square tubing once it is bent to fit the shape of the floor. They do limit side exhaust though and cost a Little more than the cheap bolt in ones. If you have the money or talent, do the Mustangs Plus kit
 

65FBE2

Member
Mar 8, 2007
283
0
17
Minnasnowta
Jun 28, 2009
#5
  • Jun 28, 2009
  • #5
 
2

2+2GT

10 Year Member
Apr 25, 2009
3,333
10
79
Southeastern Pennsylvania
Jun 28, 2009
#6
  • Jun 28, 2009
  • #6
65FBE2 said:
Image of subframe connectors
Click to expand...

The design is not bad, up to a point, the rear end is very good, and the round tube has more torsional strength than more common square tubes, but the front end is poor. If the tubes came forward another foot, ending at the wide part of the rail, it would be far stronger. As it is, it terminates at the weakest point of the front frame rail, adding no strength at at in the front. That portion of the stock rail is so weak you could bend one with your bare hands. Had the connector bridged past that, well, too late now. I would have added the stock 68-70 torque boxes, and run the tube to the front of that. What you have right now is weaker at the firewall than a stock 68 6 cylinder coupe.
 

Rusty67

20+ Year Stangneter
Dec 3, 2002
3,749
37
109
LA, CA
Jun 28, 2009
#7
  • Jun 28, 2009
  • #7
I also have the boss 302 chassis manual which I plan on using as a basic guideline for this project.

I will be using all tubular stock when I do this.
 

brianj5600

Active Member
Sep 19, 2003
1,964
2
39
Middle TN
Jun 29, 2009
#8
  • Jun 29, 2009
  • #8
I agree that running the frame connectors a little farther forward would add strength. I ran 2x3 inside the front frame rails. The floor support that most connectors weld to are not very substantial.
 

Mustang Junkie

New Member
Apr 1, 2009
6
0
2
New Mexico
Aug 18, 2009
#9
  • Aug 18, 2009
  • #9
You might want to consider adding Convertible Front Torque boxes. I did this on my 66 coupe and it looks great. It should really add to the rigidity.
 

Rusty67

20+ Year Stangneter
Dec 3, 2002
3,749
37
109
LA, CA
Aug 18, 2009
#10
  • Aug 18, 2009
  • #10
I'm planing on following the boss mustang chassis guide as much as possible. If thats not in there, I'll add it to the list. Looks are my last concern, I want this thing to be a beast on the open track =)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

68 vert where to start?
  • 67 blueberry
  • Jul 2, 2026
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
0
Views
84
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Jul 2, 2026
67 blueberry
Resolved 83 frame rail damage?
  • x_man586
  • May 13, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
6
Views
164
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 14, 2026
General karthief
Paint and Body Frame rail dimensions
  • keel
  • Jan 30, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
25
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Feb 13, 2026
keel
How to Route Subframe-Style Intermediate Brake Line?
  • cnorman31
  • Nov 29, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
0
Views
113
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Nov 29, 2025
cnorman31
M
01 mustang 3.8 fuel pressure issue
  • Mhaley2006
  • May 29, 2026
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
271
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Aug 9, 2026
JohnKay
J
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?