Hello all Ive been looking all around the net to try and figure this out. I want to see if anybody here can help me. I got a 1941 Ford Deluxe Coupe that was already done before I got it. I was told it had a Mustang subframe though I cant say for sure. I tracked down the engine and tranny by serials 1980 302, 1968 C4. I knew it had a rubbing issue when I got it. The more people in the car the more it rubs , on braking , turns or big bumps other than that, it drives seemlessly. I thought at first coil springs were weak, still might be pulled off the front tire and the springs (on each side) had one of those ratchet in lifts in them. I figure the shocks all the way around are bad they are old. I got down to looking at the tire and have a slight rub mark no damage on the outer top tread the wheel well lip has a slight abrasion not fully to the metal on the inside not the outside maybe 1/16th wide. I got to thinking this subframe whatever it might be is too wide. I cant really go any smaller on the tires they are already 165/80/15s in the front My father in law said i need to go a rim that sets back deeper. Im thinking the PO thought of this as well because the break caliper has been ground down with a grinder not the rim it is still perfectly painted. next he said go up to a 16 to give it more clearance to go back. Which sounds like another good idea. Im trying to fix this issue at minimal cost/work. How do you guys determine what parts on on cars that you pick up so that you know the proper parts to get to replace ie brakes calipers shocks springs ball joints and such. Do you have to take off each part and measure them or bring them into the parts store to match them up this seems like a big pain. Which is why I am trying to figure out how to determine what different add-ons/upgrades are. like the subframe/rearend. I plan on keeping this one therefore I want to make it safe to last and make it ride properly with no headache of buying the wrong part three times until I get the right one. I really would rather not change the subframe if it is not necessary at this time. Further down the line when more cash is around then I will. Thanks Rob
Cost wise I think your father in law is on the right track with the rim thing. You might also find a 15 inch with a differnt design that gives you more clearance on the caliper.
You could get offset wheels off a front wheel drive car but it would louse up your alignment and wear out your wheel bearings faster. Could also be dangerous, a flat tire or even a soft tire could make the steering pull hard to the side.
I can pretty much guess just from that picture that your dealing with a Camaro or Nova subframe, not a mustang II front end. Mustang II arn't installed as a "subframe" as the G.M. stuff is. The Camaro /Nova stuff is just too wide for most early cars. Unfortunately, other than to cut it off and start over there really aren't too many options to fix what you have. There are a couple of companies that make narrowed control arms for those front ends, but they come at the price of modifying an already bad roll center situation, and won't pull wheels in enough still. I'm sorry I'm not painting a very rosie picture, but I've dealt with trying to resolve this stuff a few times in this deal. Actual shots of the suspension will confirm this, but I can see just by the width what I'm pretty sure is going on.
I will get shots in the A.M. of the suspension. The Rims are Universal on front but the spare is a ford quick spare I will test it to see if it lines up as well Another option he said is a TCI Subframe he has on in his 28 Model AA truck fully decked hub to hub $2400. It took 3 hours from taking the corvair suspension off to the start of welding the tci on. He has a different on on his 29 Roadster he doesnt like because it limits wheel sizes
If it's the car in the picture, a STOCK Mustang II or Pinto front, done in the 70's, puts the wheels RIGHT where yours are, almost outboard of the fenders. The reason the track is too wide is that it was common practice to cut the crossmember and widen it, to avoid cutting the Ford frame rails. This was't that uncommon before Fatman and Heidts started making crossmembers. There is NO wheel and tire combo you're going to find to put those wheels back under the fenders where they belong. The fix is to pull the front end, trim out the crossmember, patch the frame, and use the right, non-factory, crossmember. You can use your control arms, steering and all that. How do I know this? Because I did exactly that to my '40 Ford coupe. I have no excuse, other than it was the 70's... Brian
here are pictures of the sub frame and rear end. The lug spacing is just a little over 4.5 in between 4 9/16 & 4 5/8 which i would probably attribute to wear on the whole and my tape position did it on different holes came up with the same each time
By your description and wording; I'm assuming you're new to this stuff... shocks don't hold up your car, so they have nothing to do with the stance. ...I don't recognize that clip, but it looks unsafe to me, they cut most of the main crossmember out to clear the oilpan. It looks like they added a plate under the crossmember to compensate .The pan looks like it has no clearance even now. ..to get your wheel bolt pattern,.measure from the center of one lug stud to the back side of the one 2 over, in other words, skip one lug and measure. ..It looks like a decent car, I think I'd be doin another front frame/suspension.
Those calipers are pretty unique. Ford only used them for a year or two. They went from the big 4 piston calipers to that style with the pin-on outer pad but dumped the design quickly because the pad could fall out if the head of the pin was ground off. The subframe would of had to come from a big Ford of some kind. Definately not Mustang II or Pinto because they were front steer with a rack and pinion.
He is correct, that is a big Ford front frame stub. Big bulky and wrong. From the looks of the pan, I'd say that the whole engine, trans, front stub and rear axle came from the same Ford donor car. Most likely early/Mid 70's Also they took most of the strength out of the crossmember when they hacked the middle out of it for pan clearance. If it were me I'd be looking for a new frame or plan on building a new front frame section and using a more appropriate crossmember. This is a view of a Stock MII front crossmember and suspension from the left rear side. You can easily see that it is not even like the big car suspension on the coupe. It was too wet out to flip it over and get a photo from the front.
Everybody has seen it already, but if I have my guess it;s early seventies Torino or something of that nature. Bad bad bad. Flyin'Brian, I don't wish to get into a war of words with you, but a stock width '74-'78 Mustang II is 56" hub to hub and damn near perfect for an early Ford application right out of the unibody. I have done several over the years. That is one of the suspensions that most manufacturers DON'T narrow to fit the car. I understand you were talking about widening one, but stock they fit as is with some pockets cut and boxed in the frame.
Quote "I plan on keeping this one therefore I want to make it safe to last and make it ride properly with no headache of buying the wrong part three times until I get the right one. I really would rather not change the subframe if it is not necessary at this time. Further down the line when more cash is around then I will." Sorry, but you need to do something to make it safe. I agree with Mr48Chevy. With some help and organization you can do a subframe in car, but a full frame update and transfer the body can go pretty quick budget permitting. I know it can seem expensive to buy some of the kits etc, but you save so much in time and there is a better chance you can finish the project and not get disheartened 1/2 way through and lose even more $$. Best of luck this a great forum to get some support and advice.
I am going to have to check the block numbers again what you guys are saying with full size ford makes sense the tranny says 68 fairlane/torino by its numbers. But the only thing I could come up with on the engine was 1980 full size Ford Sent from my DROID device using the TJJ mobile app
buy a whole new frame. Check craiglist 1935-1940 Ford frame - $250 (Collierville) <HR>Date: 2012-09-30, 11:34AM CDT <BUTTON style="DISPLAY: inline-block" id=reply_button type=submit>Reply to this post</BUTTON>Reply to: <SMALL>[email protected]</SMALL> <SUP>[Errors when replying to ads?]</SUP> <HR> 1935-1940 Ford frame, torque tube Will sell separately or together.. Have a few other parts also.. <!-- -->
maybe a whole other car? Switch the chassis then sell it. 1947 Ford Coupe Super Deluxe - $2750 (Olive Branch, MS) <HR>Date: 2012-10-16, 1:19PM CDT <BUTTON style="DISPLAY: inline-block" id=reply_button type=submit>Reply to this post</BUTTON>Reply to: <SMALL>[email protected]</SMALL> <SUP>[Errors when replying to ads?]</SUP> <HR> 47 Ford Coupe Super Deluxe Flathead V8 Ready to be restored back to original Condition or would be a great Street Rod or Rat Rod Good Solid Car $2,750 901-210-3760 <!-- -->
mataconcepts, the 41 frame is different from 35-40. I have a 41 frame but I'm a long way from Tennessee. Also it looks like the rear axle is tilted up waay too much. And OP, you were under that car when its up on a jack??? you could die in a hearbeat. I saw a jack pop a seal and it came down in a split second! jackstands!
No I was on zoom on the camera. I noticed the tci setups had for 35-40 then 42-48 skipped right over the 41 Sent from my DROID device using the TJJ mobile app
I have a 41 Ford with a rear steer Nova (74). We did it back in 92 and I've put quite a few miles on it, rides good handles great. I've been told by people that a Nova clip rides better than a M11 but I can't say as I don't have experience with a M11. I can say that knowing what I know now if I were to do it again I'd go with Heidts or something similar. One reason being that I have narrowed A-arms (1 1/2" per side) and I still need a 4 3/8 backspacing on my rims which of course limits what I can use. Another is you keep all attachment points for the front clip instead of needing to build everything. One thing with the narrowed A-arms is that with the backspacing I need it also put the tie rod end up close to the tire, in fact at speed (the tire grows) I would get a mark on the tire from the tie rod end. When I had the 14" rims I had to run a 185/75X14 tire. With the weight of a big block and the fact that I like to push it in the corners they didn't last long. I eventually went to a 15" rim which puts the rim by the tie rod end instead of the tire and now I run 195/65X15 and that make a real difference in tire life and handling. In this picture it's running the 195/65X15's
War of words? Unless you can't read, there is none. What I said was, it was pretty common practice to widen a Mustang or Pinto crossmember, which I did, to fit a mid 30's to 40's Ford frame to avoid cutting the frame. This puts the wheels way outboard, OK by 70's Street Rod standards, but not today. Stock width, yes, perfect, but cut and widened, not so perfect. Whatever this guy has under his car, judging by the picture, needs TO COME OUT. Obviously, cutting away the entire crossmember for oil pan clearance is a huge issue. Even cutting a Mustang II crossmember and hanging the wheels out at the edge of the fenders is better than that. We all learn, sometimes by screwing things up. Sometimes on our own cars, our own work, as I did, and sometimes by correcting somebody elses good idea gone wrong, as in this case... Brian
Hey, its semantics, but I reread what you wrote before and Ihear what you are saying but VERY clearly see what I was stating. A STOCK Pinto Mustang II suspension unit does not put the wheels outboard the fenderwells, but a widened one does... Yes I read quite well. But yes I do agree, what he has on there needs to go
As much as that subframe is hacked up, I'm curious as to what the frame/subframe joint looks like. Chances are it looks just as unsafe and you'd be better off just finding another stock frame and use a Mustang 2 kit and be done with it.
It looks to me like they chopped away part of the middle of the crossmember for oil pan clearance. I wonder how much that lets the whole damn thing flex? You measure a bolt circle straight across, by the way, from one lug hole across the full diameter of the circle to the center of the opposite side between lugs. 4 1/2" would be Ford or Mopar. IIRC 73 and back (well, to '69 anyhow) Mustang also use a suspension design like that, but I'm going from memory on model car builds from 20 years ago so I could be wrong. I just remember the odd lower control arm with the bar connected to it. Well, odd to a GM guy I guess. The rear is not Camaro/Firebird either.
The Jalopy Journal
