mustang 2 lower control arms

reborn55 · September 18, 2018, 04:27:34 PM

Been awhile since posting--need some advice or help--have 48 Chevy 2 door sedan with true Mustang 2 front end---not sure of what year. The person who built it widened it 2 inches--fits real nice in the wheel wells. one of the problems I am having it denting the front shocks--have gone to a skinnier cylinder and has helped some---but PO welded a plate on the bottom of the lower control arm and cut a large hole and installed Monte carlo shocks--which I have replaced twice in 3 years---also drilled an extra hole in the frame where the rack mounts---had to gusset both the hole for added support. I am wanting to know if anyone on the site has done this, seen this done and if I can install stock lower control arms and then install the Mustang 2 shocks. may or may not help in quality of ride-- Car has around 34k on it so it has been driven. Thanks in advance

kb426 · September 18, 2018, 05:22:25 PM

Can you take some pics to show where the interference is?

reborn55 · September 18, 2018, 05:34:17 PM

Quote from: "kb426"Can you take some pics to show where the interference is?

kb426 · September 18, 2018, 05:57:23 PM

Am I correct in assuming that the lower control arm is the stock length and the reason for the shock change was increased suspension travel?

reborn55 · September 18, 2018, 06:01:55 PM

as far as I can tell---the lower control arm is stock length---I don't know why it was done-keep denting shocks--would like to go to stock arms and stock mustang shocks--upper arms are stock---just widened 2 inches and modified control arm

reborn55 · September 18, 2018, 06:05:32 PM

phat46 · September 18, 2018, 07:45:43 PM

I have a '46 with a stock Must II front end under it, not widened. I used Must II shocks and it's fine. I think I used the Must II V 6 shocks, the V 8 might be a bit stiff as there is actually less weight on the front end when installed in a '46-'48 Chevy. (They go in there like they were meant to!)

enjenjo · September 18, 2018, 07:54:19 PM

That is a stock lower control arm, that has a plate welded to the bottom. The 3/8" hole on the front and back on the vertical part of the control arm at the spring pocket are the mounting holes for a Mustang shock. If you cut the plate away, you should be able to use the control arm as is. The Mustang shock has the suspension snubber on the shock shaft at the top. As it looks now you have no snubber. I am enclosing a picture of a Mustang shock

reborn55 · September 18, 2018, 08:37:45 PM

Thanks---I already knew that---This is the first setup like that I have seen was just curious if any one had seen that setup before and if there was a reason for doing it---will probably just go ahead and get new lower control arms--thanks again--also trying to find some who have used the widened setup--have seen a couple in the past but never talked to anyone who had one

enjenjo · September 18, 2018, 11:04:10 PM

I have widened a few in the past.Primarily for early 30's Chevys What questions do you have.

reborn55 · September 19, 2018, 09:48:48 AM

Thanks again--figured you had---Just wondering how strong it really is as the PO used one exixting hole in the frame for the rack and then drilled another one in the frame for the other mounting hole---when I got it there was no support I guess you could say to keep frame from collapsing--I put pieces of pipe in the hole --welded plate on back of frame--where the gussets were--to keep frame from squishing. then the control arms really had me befuddled as to why the plate on the bottom---kept dimpling shock and one set even collapse enough to be come useless. doesn't handle too bad--left side seems to dip more hitting a bump or dip in the road and might be feeeling some wobble---Suspension components are good--just replaced lower bushings, p/s pump and rack. Just like to fine tune it. Sway bar if neessary. if stock control arms and new Mustang 2 shocks would improve things so be it---getting ready for a another trip to Florida again---thanks for your help

enjenjo · September 19, 2018, 01:08:14 PM

If the rack is offset to one side or the other that car cause a difference in how the suspension reacts from one side or the other. The correct way to do it is a two inch rack extension to the tie rods are the same length on both sides. I'm guessing the original builder used a longer Fox Mustang tie rod end on the right side to make up the distance. Heidts has the rack extenders.

For 41 to 48 Chevys a Mustang II 4 cylinder spring with one coil cut from the top sets the lower conrtol arms level in most cases. You might try a half coil first if there is any question in your mind.

A S10 sway bar will work by welding a tab to the front of the lower control arm in the right location for the sway bar link.

reborn55 · September 19, 2018, 01:30:33 PM

Thanks again--the rack is from 1980 version with the longer tie rods-- lock to loc on teh steering is centered and one tie rod end is adjusted amore than the other---the lower control arms are just about level---to be perfectly level I have installed a 1 inch rubber spacer but ride suffered and I took them out--didn't think an S-10 would work--tried to mock one up with no luck--will have to go back and try again or may opt for longer CE bar--thanks again

reborn55 · September 21, 2018, 07:42:57 PM

Ok now I am confused--when I got the car it had the shorter tie rod ends---from working on a 36 chevy with short tie rods and no turning radius among other things we installed the longer ones---on the 48 I have replaced both tie rod ends with the longer tie rod ends--so I really don't see where the lextension would fit with my setup--correct me if I am wrong---there is very little differnece in length on each side--may look that way in the picture but not really---have equal turns frome center to each side--clearance full lock is same on each side---if I need teh reack extender I will get but--THANKS

enjenjo · September 21, 2018, 11:19:40 PM

The turning radius depends on the length of the steering arm on the spindle versus the rack travel. The shorter the steering arm, the more turning radius you get with the same rack. As long as the toe in can be set properly the tie rod end length doesn't change the turning radius, or the amount it can turn each way.

Measure the distance from the inner tie rod ends to the stud on the outer tie rod end, I believe you will find a difference from one side to the other. The rack extension will go on the side with the longer tie rod so both tie rods are the same length within a quarter inch or so.

The reason it can cause bump steer with the wider crossmember, on the right side the inner tie rod end no longer lines up with the control arm arc as it moves up and down so it moves the tire in and out more as the suspension moves.