Register now to get rid of these ads!

anyone use a Aerostar frontend?

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by draggin breath, Sep 20, 2007.

  1. draggin breath
    Joined: Feb 5, 2006
    Posts: 509

    draggin breath
    Member

    While BSing about IFS someone mentioned using one from a Aerostar van;has anyone used one or what drawbacks do they have? What is thetreadwidth? seems like it would hide well in a fat fendered car.
     
  2. Front end is a PoS under the AeroStar. Why would ya' wanta' put a PoS under a rod?
     
  3. draggin breath
    Joined: Feb 5, 2006
    Posts: 509

    draggin breath
    Member

    This is why the question was asked. What exactly makes it a POS? Supposedly a lot of early '50's pickups get them...I'm open to facts.
     
  4. POS.......= Piece Of Shit..........

    frankie ROCKS
     

  5. Fat Cat
    Joined: Mar 3, 2001
    Posts: 238

    Fat Cat
    Member

    They ride crappy. They are real tall in the spindle area, like twice the height of a normal spindle. The racks all whine and there is nothing you can do to fix the whine. Rebuilt racks whine from the moment you put them on. I have owned 2 and would not consider them for an Aerostar much less anything else. I can tell an Aerostar behind me without even turning around. The sound is quite distinctive.
     
  6. Silhouettes 57
    Joined: Dec 9, 2006
    Posts: 2,791

    Silhouettes 57
    Member

    WOW!! Somebody actually gave you an answer other then just saying it's a POS.... Thank You Fat cat.
     
  7. hmmm... never heard that. only heard a few guys on the ford truck enthusiasts board talk about how easy they went in....
     
  8. diamond dave
    Joined: Jul 18, 2006
    Posts: 458

    diamond dave
    Member

    I had a buddy who used to swear by em' . or was it at em? but seriously, he liked em. I was wondering the same thing about an astro front end. the only thing I would be concerned about is the fact that the engine is affset to the right about 2 inches on all g.m. vans. this might be a problem when trying to get an engine in there centered. don't know if the aerostars are the same way.
    hell, if you wanna do it. . . do it. if you don't like it,. . . take it out and start over. you may have the next mustang II on your hands. then again. . . maybe not.
     
  9. KernCountyKid
    Joined: Jul 11, 2006
    Posts: 376

    KernCountyKid
    Member
    from Arkansas

    Aren't Pacer front ends supposed to be good for IFS swaps?
     
  10. CURIOUS RASH
    Joined: Jun 2, 2002
    Posts: 9,635

    CURIOUS RASH
    Classified's Moderator

    We had an Aerostar as a delivery van...

    That hing rode like shit empty or full.

    No way I would stick any part of it in a rod...
     
  11. Pacers might work, but where the hell do you find those anymore? I have never seen one in a junkyard, and I've been going in them since the early 90s... and I've only seen one or two being shown or driven on the road.

    Aerostars you can at least find in junkyards pretty easy. But it sounds like they're not worth the trouble.
     
  12. MarkX
    Joined: Apr 8, 2003
    Posts: 1,232

    MarkX
    Member
    from ...TX

    but a Mustang II is traditional!................... and it the same as a pinto,,,,, and is better under a car thats twice as heavy as the car it was originally designed for,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, (<------ danger sarcastic coment)
     
  13. thrasher
    Joined: Nov 23, 2006
    Posts: 349

    thrasher
    Member

    i heard the aerostar front end was a heavy duty version of the mustang II. if thats true, it should handle about the same, just ride stiffer. maybe it would be better for a heavier car.
     
  14. Let's see, you have several facts from other posts.

    How about bump steer, tire wear, ride comfort and the fact that they are made like a PoS!!!!!!!!!!!

    It always amazes me how one guy can install something under a car 'cause it just happens to be layin' in the back yard. Then 'cause it fits and it's cheap, it's the greatest thing since the birth control pill.

    Yep, remember the hot set-up years ago was Corvair front ends :eek: . PoS then and is a PoS now.

    Mustang II's are also a PoS in their stock form. The kits sold today don't even resemble what Ford did in the mid-70's. We did suspension studies on them years ago and found they were crap in stock form then and are still crap today. BUT, they are/were cheap. But, CHEAP must = GOOD :rolleyes: .
     
  15. CURIOUS RASH
    Joined: Jun 2, 2002
    Posts: 9,635

    CURIOUS RASH
    Classified's Moderator

    Find out what Tyler = Flt-Blk used on his Elky. That thing is perfect...
     
  16. draggin breath
    Joined: Feb 5, 2006
    Posts: 509

    draggin breath
    Member

    Thanks for the input; I'll be looking for something else.There aren't many Aerostars left around here anymore anyway.I'll check out an Astro;does anyone know if any small bolt pattern rotors fit?
     
  17. J Man
    Joined: Dec 11, 2003
    Posts: 4,131

    J Man
    Member
    from Angola, IN

    How about letting us know what you are building and then we can suggest something that would work for you.
     
  18. Model A Nut
    Joined: Mar 30, 2007
    Posts: 65

    Model A Nut
    Member

    Glad to see this post. I have an Aerostar panel from a fleet sell. I love driving it around till the tranny shit. Was under and saw how east it comes out complete. Looks like a good swap to me and I am going to use it. I will post what happens. I have three '78 Mustang II front and that is a lot of cutting, grinding and, welding. The van just un-bolts. Ceap is what most us guys need and thats what a rat rod really makes a statement as to me personnaly. I finally got a body now I have to go cheap and DRIVE!!!!!! Will definately keep up with this post.
     
    MrBullet likes this.
  19. mustangsix
    Joined: Mar 7, 2005
    Posts: 1,403

    mustangsix
    Member

    The Aerostar rack is the same design as the one in the Mustang, Thunderbird, and all other fox platforms. If it whines, its probably because of a crappy pump. There was an issue with that at one time.
     
  20. LB+1
    Joined: Sep 28, 2006
    Posts: 581

    LB+1
    Member
    from 71291

    The wine is in the pump! Do what you want get out of the RAT box!
    It will work and drive right!!! Thank you lb+1
     
    MrBullet likes this.
  21. If it's crap in the van, it's probably because the van weighs more than the 3000-3400 lbs a Mustang or T-bird weighs. Which means the front end has no place on a car much over 3500 lbs with no one sitting in it. Less than that, if you're fat.
     
  22. OldsRanch
    Joined: Feb 18, 2004
    Posts: 185

    OldsRanch
    Member

    The new 1/2 ton 2wd ram trucks have a beautiful front end on 'em. Rack and pinion, aluminum? spindles, nice sway bar, and so on. I'd consider it if I was building a heavy car.
     
  23. Nads
    Joined: Mar 5, 2001
    Posts: 11,862

    Nads
    Member
    from Hypocrisy

    We had an Aerostar work van, it almost killed me, it spun outta control on minimaly wet pavement and got hit by a semi truck. It wasn't hit bad enough to be undriveable but a week later it met its end when it flipped over on an off ramp and almost killed another employee. It was the worst work van we've ever had.
     
  24. mustangsix
    Joined: Mar 7, 2005
    Posts: 1,403

    mustangsix
    Member

  25. Same reason I shy away from any modern Ford shit, don't like the way they drive, that company has made too many bad decisions in the past 40yr's if you ask me! Take a look at the Ford truck suspensions starting in the late 60's, and how long it took to finally conform, kinda like their stubborn ass founder and his "steel-draulic" bs.
     
  26. Revhead
    Joined: Mar 19, 2001
    Posts: 3,027

    Revhead
    Member
    from Dallas, TX


    HAHA just what I was thinking... I never heard anyone say Mustang IIs handeld
     
  27. 31whitey
    Joined: Jan 2, 2007
    Posts: 2,214

    31whitey
    Member

    my friend jumped his moms like 50 feet down some dudes driveway
    the diffs made holes in the asphalt
    the frame needed some straightning, but the spindels were fine
    that thing would start without a key, and do the most massive brake stands after that
     
  28. Hackerbilt
    Joined: Aug 13, 2001
    Posts: 6,254

    Hackerbilt
    Member

    I think they're ugly...and it seems like Ford was using them in an experimental mode because the only one I ever worked on had solid-rod like upper control arms with a really flimsy look to them and some weird encapsulated rubber tierod ends.
    Guess what we were replacing??? LOL

    The front end isn't a large version of the Mustang 2 either. If you looked at them side by side you'd see major differences!

    The 60's and 70's Twin-I-beam was a way to have the strength of an actual I beam axle with a form of independant suspension. It's main design requirement was strength in trucks, not driveability, so it's handling didn't compare favorably with the common SLA type of independant suspension...but it was tough as hell...at least until they started to tame it with 4x4 versions and even ball joints instead of kingpins.
    You can't compare them to other forms of independant suspension due to the totally different design requirements the engineers were given.

    Mustang 2 suspension is garbage?
    Maybe!
    But in fairness the design should be compared to its peers of the same era.
    It's closest competition was the VEGA.
    Stephen King should write a book about THAT frontend!
    Regardless...it was NOT a "crossmember" design that could be cut out and still retain its basic structure, so it was useless for swapping anyway.

    The Corvair? Removable, but had issues with Ackerman during a swap and it had small joints and drum brakes.

    M2 WAS about the best available for a sensible price at the time and the stock crossmember was easy to cut out or even buy over the Ford parts counter. It's no wonder it became popular.
    AMAZING its still considered the one to have!
    Force of habit or fear of change I guess...

    Astro van?
    Thats a full front stub frame clip like an early Nova or Camaro - not a removable crossmember setup.

    Isn't the steering box on a weird angle to ease the van column angle?
    That would mean that a swap into a Hot Rod or something would have BAD column joint angles to contend with compared to the basic Nova clip.

    Worth a look I suppose...but it would need to be a VERY critical look...because its real easy to screw up a good car by winging it on your own and making hasty decisions.

    Research is the key!
     
  29. 53chieftian
    Joined: Aug 13, 2005
    Posts: 611

    53chieftian
    Member

    A friend of mine used an astro fron on a 49 chevy cab over. worked sweet for that situation.
     
  30. Something to consider as well with the aerostar is the width. They are wide. The wheels are almost flat on the outside. With a normal wheel or reversed wheel they would be really wide. Just ask a friend of mine. He installed one in his 55 ford 2-door. Didn't notice the width. Did when he pulled off the areostar wheels and put his wheels on. Ended up narrowing it and having real grief trying to get an alignment that would go down the road rite. Finally corrected, but not worth the hassle. Pat.
     

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.