Ford Mustang Forums banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
540 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
here's a run down of what i'm about to do.

85 K member
95 A arms
95 spindles
pbr calipers
10.5" rotors (right?)
95 struts

I'm going to autoX this car so camber is good. i would go for a tubular K but funds are limited at the time. i was wandering too if anyone has tried aluminum bushings in the Aarms? let me know
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,157 Posts
Are you just asking about aluminum bushings for the a-arms? Or about what we thing about using the listed parts for autocrossing?

I am not really sure why you would want to use aluminum bushings in the control arms. The ends of the bushings act as a bearing surface to the k-member. Aluminum riding on steel doesn't really make a good bearing as the arm goes up and down. Urethane or Delrin would work better. If you are planning on driving the car to the autocross location, just stick with the urethane bushings. If this is a trailered only car, and you are looking at shaving fractions of a second off, then perhaps an aluminum/delrin bushing would work. Looking at your listed parts, you are far from there. To really make the front of a Mustang grip, you will need more than what is listed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
540 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
i was just curious about the aluminum bushings. I've read that the 85 K is 1" narrower than a fox so putting SN95 A arms should yield me .83" greater than the fox. I'm running a 245/45/17 up front and it's lowered about 1.5". For now in the rear, i'm running boxed upper and lowers with PH bar. I've got a TA made but i'm waiting on Ubolts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,157 Posts
ditch those boxed upper arms fast! Those are not what you want! I would also get rid of the boxed lower arms and go with a set of MM tubular arms with a 3-peice bushing or hiem joints on both ends. Being boxed, they are probably using a one peice bushing in both ends. Another no-no for the rear.

I used an 1984 narrow k-member with 03 Cobra arms and 03 Mach 1 spindles along with a set of 245/45ZR17 tires. I widened the fenders because the wheel stuck out, otherwise everything fit just fine. The inner fenders were tossed a long time ago, so no rubbing there. Make sure you get a bumpsteer kit for the tie rods to help dial in the front suspension with the mix-matched front parts.

I would just stick with the urethane front arm bushings, and address some of the other concerns with your suspension first. Spring rates, dampers, control arms, bumpsteer, alignment, and chassis stiffening should be at the top of your list. Fancy bushings should be last. When you are at that point, you will be ready for a proper k-member and arms.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,448 Posts
I too am using the stock narrow K on my 86. I'm currently using nearly the set-up you are: a-arms are 04 Mach 1s, spindles are 95, brakes are 01 Cobra, springs are FMS "C"s, wheels are 96 Cobra 17" running 245/45/17s. I'm using the MM bumpsteer kit designed for the longer a-arms and sn95 spindles with fox rack, and MM CC plates with Bilstein struts. The longer a-arms caused the car to drop a least another .5" from its previous stance with the stock suspension and C springs. As it currently sits (25" ground to lip in the front), the outside of the tire is even with the fender lip with -1* camber and all the caster it will take and be even on both sides. This configuration does hit the fender on mild bumps and when stopping, but does not hit going up and down driveways with the wheels turned. It does not hit the fender extension but it is close. I have not rolled the fenders and the innner fenderwell is in place. To remedy the rubbing, I've purchased an MM coilover kit to raise it a little and will probably roll the fender lip some. I like this look; far more aggresive than with the wheels tucked in, and although I've not done extensive testing turn-in and front grip appear to have dramatically improved. I've also noticed a lot less tramlining and bumpsteer eventhough I've not really adjusted bumpsteer from the configuration MM said to start with. With this said, the rear wheels tuck in too much with the front track the way it is, so I'm putting on some .5" spacers which should be just about right and not cause interference with the rear wheelwell.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,314 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
488 Posts
^actually, for autocross, the 10.5" rotors would be good. You don't have the same heat and dissapation issues that you have on a road course and all of the hardware is lighter, reducing overall, unsprung and rotational weight (rotors only, of course).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,314 Posts
That would require modified spindles and or brackets to fit the smaller rotors, which he didn't list.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
540 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
goduke- i actually read a post on using fox struts instead of sn95's. if i'm not forced to sell this car, i'll be running it in ITE in the future so i'll go with 13" rotors.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top