|
Register or Log In To remove these advertisements. |
|
|
|
|||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
10-17-2009, 12:45 PM
|
#1 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 818
|
mustang II front suspensions.....
so i know a few guys are running the fatman kits and really like them. just curious what other people are running and how they like theirs.
|
|
|
|
10-17-2009, 03:12 PM
|
#2 |
|
Account Suspended
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: over yonder
Posts: 14,270
|
Re: mustang II front suspensions.....
What advantage does a MII bring to our trucks?
|
|
|
|
|
10-17-2009, 04:12 PM
|
#3 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: high point nc
Posts: 442
|
Re: mustang II front suspensions.....
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-17-2009, 10:08 PM
|
#4 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: HOUSTON TX
Posts: 1,161
|
Re: mustang II front suspensions.....
what advantages does it not bring?
|
|
|
|
|
10-18-2009, 01:16 AM
|
#5 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: DALLAS,TX
Posts: 22,066
|
Re: mustang II front suspensions.....
Quote:
__________________
67SWB-B.B.RetroRod 64SWB-Recycle 89CCDually-Driver/Tow Truck 99CCSWB Driver All Fleetsides @rattlecankustoms in IG Building a small, high rpm engine with the perfect bore, stroke and rod ratio is very impressive. It's like a highly skilled Morrocan sword fighter with a Damascus Steel Scimitar..... Cubic inches is like Indiana Jones with a cheap pistol. |
|
|
|
|
|
10-18-2009, 09:32 AM
|
#6 | |
|
just can't cover up my redneck
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Columbus OH
Posts: 11,414
|
Re: mustang II front suspensions.....
Plus there is the fact that the MII suspension was designed for a small car with a 4cylinder engine and more than 1000lbs less total weight.
Personally, I have never been a fan of that front suspension set-up under any kind of big car either. By the time you "up-grade" everything, the cost has gotten a litte crazy too. The money would be much better spent on the stock suspension.
__________________
You can review the site's rules here. Quote:
Bad planning on your part does not necessarily constitute an instant emergency on my part.... The great thing about being a pessimist is that you are either pleasantly surprised or right. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-18-2009, 11:08 AM
|
#7 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: HOUSTON TX
Posts: 1,161
|
Re: mustang II front suspensions.....
All good points, i was just wondering mostly on the rack side of it. seems like you eliminate alot of linkage when using rack and pinion. I guess that is why porterbuilt is so successful with his kit. keeps all the truck stuff and gets rid of all the linkage.
|
|
|
|
|
10-18-2009, 11:26 AM
|
#8 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: DALLAS,TX
Posts: 22,066
|
Re: mustang II front suspensions.....
Quote:
__________________
67SWB-B.B.RetroRod 64SWB-Recycle 89CCDually-Driver/Tow Truck 99CCSWB Driver All Fleetsides @rattlecankustoms in IG Building a small, high rpm engine with the perfect bore, stroke and rod ratio is very impressive. It's like a highly skilled Morrocan sword fighter with a Damascus Steel Scimitar..... Cubic inches is like Indiana Jones with a cheap pistol. |
|
|
|
|
|
10-20-2009, 06:40 AM
|
#9 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Louisville,Ky
Posts: 5,811
|
Re: mustang II front suspensions.....
If you don't care about handling or a smooth ride on rough roads then get one.I would keep what you got get better a arms.Flaming river has a rack and pinion kit for the 73-87 trucks you might be able to make it work with yours.Or i think porterbuilt c4 member you can use coilovers on.
|
|
|
|
|
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
