1996 up spindle with fox length axles

[LT1HAHA]

In the middle of a 5 lug swap.

I have got a set of 2001 spindles and was planning on running the fox length axles. Will this make the fronts stick out while the back tires looked tucked in? Anyone have any pics of this setup.

I am going to be running 275/40/17 front and rear. Front is no problem as I will be stretching the stock fenders. If I run the SN95 length axles I'm pretty sure it will have rear fender clearance issues.....

Rims are 17X9 Cobra R's with 6.0 backspacing and 24mm offset

[MFE]

I don't think it'll look tucked. I have 96+ spindles and fox length axles with 245/45-17's and it appears pretty even to me, although I'm considering spacers for the rear wheels for clearance purposes. They rub the inner fender (which I've pounded as far as I can) and the tailpipes.

Hard to tell from a side view but here it sits in track form



And in action


And when it had '94-95 spindles on the front

[LT1HAHA]

Thanks MFE! Your advise and experience has been much appreciated through-out this swap.

Great looking car BTW. Yours don't look "tucked" but really it's hard to tell from those views.

Feel free to take an updated side photo shot for me.

[MFE]

What angle do you want it from? It's never struck me as "looking" tucked no matter what way I look at it, but I just took a quickie measurement with my DIY toe gauge and the front track appears to be, in fact, 1.5 inches wider than the rear...which happens to correspond perfectly with the fact that SN95 rear axles are .75 inches longer each than my fox axles are.

[LT1HAHA]

Originally Posted by MFE

What angle do you want it from?

Straight down the side of the car.

Originally Posted by MFE

I just took a quickie measurement with my DIY toe gauge and the front track appears to be, in fact, 1.5 inches wider than the rear...which happens to correspond perfectly with the fact that SN95 rear axles are .75 inches longer each than my fox axles are.

Thats what I was figuring. Just wondered if the 3/4" was rather visibly noticable. It appears that it is visually negligable.

[Shakerhood]

Originally Posted by LT1HAHA

In the middle of a 5 lug swap.

I have got a set of 2001 spindles and was planning on running the fox length axles. Will this make the fronts stick out while the back tires looked tucked in? Anyone have any pics of this setup.

I am going to be running 275/40/17 front and rear. Front is no problem as I will be stretching the stock fenders. If I run the SN95 length axles I'm pretty sure it will have rear fender clearance issues.....

Rims are 17X9 Cobra R's with 6.0 backspacing and 24mm offset

Its not a good idea to run 96-04 Front Spindles unless you are using an Aftermarket K Member!

[LT1HAHA]

Originally Posted by Shakerhood

Its not a good idea to run 96-04 Front Spindles unless you are using an Aftermarket K Member!

I know I know..... I have done the research.......

I am confident I can make it work just fine and save me the money and hassle from switching spindles again when I get the K member.

[foxbody302]

Ive got some pics of what you want, but i believe the 01 spindles push the wheels out further than my 96 spindles.

[foxbody302]

Here ya go.







I hope this helps, I think the track width is perfect.

[LT1HAHA]

Perfect!!

If I am correct, which I think I am, the 96-04 spindles are the same.

Thanks so much! Looks great!

[MFE]

Here's mine as of this afternoon.

[foxbody302]

I like the fit of my 01 gt wheels up front, i wish they were a little wider out back.

[MFE]

OK, you want tucked? Here's from tonight's Touring Club event at Heartland Park's road course

[LT1HAHA]

Originally Posted by MFE

OK, you want tucked? Here's from tonight's Touring Club event at Heartland Park's road course

LOL!

Thanks guys!

[jaa55]

ive run 2001 spindles on my 93 fox for a year with a stock K member i havent noticed any outrageous bump steer.
i have sn95 axles in the rear. i personally dont think i would even want to run stock length axles in the back, i like the wider stance
im changing to 94-95 spindles in the front just so i can run a different wheel selection.

and yes 96-04 all are 8mm wider

[Brian47]

I assume this to be the dimension you are concerned with, when referring to being "tucked". If so, I would like to know what people consider "tucked"?

No offense MFE, and I sure hope this doesn't come out wrong or mean, but I consider the rims on your car to be "tucked". Granted this is all personal opinion, as some love the wheels in a couple inches, some love them at the edge of the wheel well, and still others love them sticking 6" out past the fenders.

Correct me if I am wrong in my statement, but 96 spindles and fox axles; if running the same wheels front and back will tuck the rear in the fenders much more.

[LT1HAHA]

Originally Posted by Brian47

Correct me if I am wrong in my statement, but 96 spindles and fox axles; if running the same wheels front and back will tuck the rear in the fenders much more.

Thats what I thought too. However, it appears as that is not really the case. I knew that the front track width would be more in front than the rear (.75" per side) I was wondering how noticable it was. It appears to be visually negligable. Sure, you can see it if your looking for it but it's not so obvious that anyone looking at the car would notice the track width differences.

[MFE]

That pic is what it looks like with 96 spindles and fox axles

Originally Posted by Brian47

I assume this to be the dimension you are concerned with, when referring to being "tucked". If so, I would like to know what people consider "tucked"?

No offense MFE, and I sure hope this doesn't come out wrong or mean, but I consider the rims on your car to be "tucked". Granted this is all personal opinion, as some love the wheels in a couple inches, some love them at the edge of the wheel well, and still others love them sticking 6" out past the fenders.

Correct me if I am wrong in my statement, but 96 spindles and fox axles; if running the same wheels front and back will tuck the rear in the fenders much more.

[Brian47]

Interesting, I have 94-95 spindles on mine, and my 18x9 rims site right flush with the fender (tire actually rubs). If I had the wider 96 ones, my tires would almost stick out past the edge of the fender.

My thoughts were the fox length axles were set up so narrow, that any rim that fits the front right, would tuck in the back (using the same size front and rear rims). The 96 spindles move the rims out, and the fox 5 lug rears don't. I figure this would make that offset of a tucked rear and non tucked front look even more off (basically throw the track widths off front to rear, more so than they would be stock). Interesting the rims sit like they do, when a stock fox set up, the rears tuck more so than the fronts.

I might be confusing people, sorry if I am.

[foxbody302]

Look at my 3rd pic those are 9 inch bullits, the rear are deep, but as you can see the track width is perfect with that setup.

[Brian47]

The front width looks good, the rears are where they seem tucked, when using that set up. My sisters 89 GT has this same issue. the Front rims sit nice in the wheel well, the rears tuck up under.

[MFE]

Now you've gone and rekindled my desire to have SN95-width rear end

I'd just put some spacers on it but the studs are too short. Unless I change studs, I have to change axles. If I change axles, I need different rear brake brackets

And reviewing this video of my car in action from my buddy's Viper on Wednesday, yeah...back end looks a little narrow. Mustang action starts at 1:25

http://videos.streetfire.net/video/H...ays_644178.htm

[LT1HAHA]

I would go with the SN95 axles too. BUT, looking at the car if I add .75" per side PLUS the addition of a 275 tire, there is no way it will clear.

Really, if I added the SN95 axles now, even with the 245 tire, it would still be close. To bad widening the rear fenders isn't as easy as widening the fronts!..

Good video BTW. Is that Viper stock? Do you know what his lap times are compared to yours?

[MFE]

Viper is a bone stock early '93. When he's running hard and confident of his tires (which he wasn't, that night) he's probably 4-6 seconds a lap faster on that configuration.

[Shakerhood]

Originally Posted by LT1HAHA

I would go with the SN95 axles too. BUT, looking at the car if I add .75" per side PLUS the addition of a 275 tire, there is no way it will clear.

Really, if I added the SN95 axles now, even with the 245 tire, it would still be close. To bad widening the rear fenders isn't as easy as widening the fronts!..

Good video BTW. Is that Viper stock? Do you know what his lap times are compared to yours?

A 17x9 Wheel with 6.42" of Backspace will work great with 275 tires and SN95 Axles.

[stykthyn]

Originally Posted by foxbody302

Here ya go.







I hope this helps, I think the track width is perfect.

are the front bullits 9" as well?

[prk109]

Ok i am lost I am putting mach 1 wheel on a 92 fox mustang should I use 94/95 spindles or 96 up? If I use 99 and front brakes or cobra brakes do I change master cylinder?

[foxbody302]

Originally Posted by stykthyn

are the front bullits 9" as well?

YES they are.

[stykthyn]

Originally Posted by foxbody302

YES they are.

are you using the stock k member?

[foxbody302]

Originally Posted by stykthyn

are you using the stock k member?

Yes for now. I do have offset a-arm bushing though.

[WhiteLX]

I run the 01 spindles and fox rear axles. Rear is tucked slightly, but not enough to avoid having to roll the fender lips. The front sticks out ever so slightly at ride height, but under compression it just kisses the lip. It has rubbed the paint off the front lips on the inside. If I ran more camber it would probably be even with the front lips.

Wheels are 17x8.5 and 17x9.5, both with 20mm offset. 255/40R17 and 275/40R17.

Not sure how well you'll be able to tell from these pics.