Attn. suspension gurus: Mustang II problems.

I have a '49 dodge wayfarer that my father and I built about 10 years ago. It has a fatman mustang II stub in it with the widened powe rack. We've driven it all over the northwest, but last year it developed some suspension problems that got so bad we couldn't even drive it in town. It feels as if it's just wandering down the road. Yesterday, we replaced the tie rod ends, spindles, bearings, and front shocks. It got a lot better, but there's still a disconnect with the steering. I'd like to get it drive a lot better, much like my mom's 50 chevy that also has a mustang II. My question is, what would make it feel like this from the steering wheel? I'd like to work thorough one thing at a time and get it so we can enjoy the car.

 

how are the ball jionts? and alignment?

 

Check for cracks and check to see if it can be aligned.

Check your front springs, these cars can't just sit there for 10 years on a set of springs with out any care.

In before the lock.

 

Ball joints, bushings and or alignment. Also tires that are worn round shouldered can contribute to less then stellar driving.

Start by sticking a jack under the control arm close to the ball joint and raise the tire a couple of inches off the floor then take a bar and see if you can move the tire up and down. You will have to watch the lower ball joint to see if or how much movement there is in it when you do this.

 

Given the age and mileage, might be a good idea to go ahead and replace the balljoints anyway. Check all of the other stuff, bushings, etc. and what the others said.

 

Check alignment if it is slide adjust on upper control arm they like to slip and make things go crazy.

 

Did the problem develop and get worse over a period of time, or did it occur suddenly?

Bob

 

The u joiunts maybe worn out,loose,if support bearing,or rack not good any more.

 

Did you check the rack bushings and fasteners that tighten it to the crossmember? If these are bad or loose it could do some strange stuff.

 

Have a look underneath as someone turns the steering wheel back and forth. You should be able to see what's loose. Could be the rack.

 

why were spindles replaced? unless they were damaged (wrecked) or the bearings wore into them , there is no wear on them. just curious....jack

 

Please post when you have solved the problem.

 

Thank for the suggestions so far guys. The rack doesn't move and we made sure the steering was all tight with me under there yesterday. The ball joints seemed to be fine, that's why we didn't change them. The reason we replaced the spindles is that the passenger side had wallowed out the hole where the tie rod end attaches. We'll get it alligned again this week.

 

It may have just slipped the adjustment. It only takes a few degrees to go from good to crazy.

 

If you replaced the tie rod ends did you have it aligned again? Counting the turns of the tie rod end will get you to the alignment shop but it should be checked. Too much toe in or even toe out can cause one tire to cause the car to dart to one side and then if the other tire gets more traction it will want to dart in the other direction. I'd try a different set of tires on a trial basis to see if the tires are worn which can cause a similar problem.

 

I'm also in with an atrocious toe condition or one of the upper arms is sliding. You can eyeball up the toe to get in close, look for shiny metal between the arm and where it mounts. Give it a quick shot of paint, from the a-arm shaft to the mount. Let it dry and drive it around, you'll be able to see if it moved.

Bob

 

Hows everything out back???

 

ElPolacko will probably chime in when he opens shop in a bit, but you mentioned a Fatman clip. Something I know he repairs with their stuff frequently is the rear wall of the crossmember itself. If you have the "strut eliminator" type lower arms, they don't provide a second bracket to put them in double shear. The net result is that over years of braking force, the lower arm fulcrums and tears the rear wall of the crossmember out. It always shows up as you say where it gets squirrelier and squirrelier as the crossmember gradually tears larger and larger. Crawl under and take a good srong look at the backside of the crossmember itself, please.

 

'Nother quick thought too. You mentioned the "wider power rack". I'm not aware that they made this particular clip wider to fit that vehicle. Is there any chance that you just reacently put the power rack on the car, possibly replacing a manual rack? If this is the case, could very easily be bump steer because of the rack inner pivot locations.

 

The conditions you describe sound an awful lot like a bad suspension bushing. Check for feathering in your tires tread pattern. It will tell you quite a bit about what is going on.

The Fatman stuff is notorious for thin upper control arm mounts. Check for cracks around the upper control arm mounts and where the spring seats in the upper mount. Quite a few of the tubular control arms and strut rod eliminators used very small rubber bushings that fail rather quickly (at least around here) and don't "look" bad until you disassemble them and really inspect the conditions.

Fatman also used those very narrow lower control arms on IFS kits about the vintage you describe. They had no strut rod, and bolted directly to the outsides of the lower crossmember beam. No spacers or anything, just very narrow arms. They offered little or no control to the suspension.

Various other strut rod "eliminator" kits had similar problems with the ability to control braking torque. These were Mac Guyver parts from Canada.

 

I would like to see your ball socket (on the rack) and control arm pivot relationship. I tried to help some guys out that put a Phatman under a shoe box with air bags and the camber was only correct in what ever height we set it at. It would tow out as it lifted and towed in as it laid. It was all due to the rack being to long from ball socket to ball socket.
I know you don't have bags but springs do sag over time and you may be getting onto that "Zone" where the camber doesn't hold true when deflecting or "traveling". This is going to amount to some bad bump steer. The best way to tell if this could be an issue is to, imagin a line that that goes from the lower control arm bushing to the upper, where ever your rack is mounted, the socket should be in line with that (left to right, not front to back speaking) and in line with your spindle tie rod mounts (front to back)

 

Thanks guys, I'll take some pictures of the setup as soon as I get a chance. The car is still in my dad's garage. Need Louvers, the rack is wider and always has been; the kit came with a piece to widen the track when we put it all together. I know it doesn't seem like it should need to be wider, since neither the one in my mom's '50 chevy, nor my '53 chevy wagon are.
Elpolacko, I was hoping you'd chime in. If I were closer to you, I would just haul the car to you and have you fix it. I've watched the video on the deflection before and ours doesn't move like that, but I still plan on adding some support to the back of the control arm. I'll pull apart the control arms and see what's goin on. After watching that last year, it made me decide to use stock control arms and strut rods on my '53 wagon and I'm glad I did.

 

Call Brent (Fatman)

 

Good on the stock control arms and strut rods on these! It makes stuff soooo much easier to set up ad diagnose when there is a problem.

Still curious about the rack width though. If you have a chance, can you measure the distance between the lower control arm inner pivots? I can't quite see why that kit would have been wider. My '48 stock had the same tread width as you car, and my fender clearance with a stock Mustang II crossmember is minimal. Just wondering if it had to be there in the first place. Elpolacko and I talked about 6:30 Phoenix time this evening and kicked a couple of ideas around, but that width is kinda a baseline as to what was done in the engineering stage. He still is leaning towards bad inner pivot bushings flopping around. You never seem to know how bad they realy are until ya pull them.

 

I'll take a look and some measurements this weekend.

 

Just re-read your opening statement again.

Check your steering column, universal joints and pillow blocks if you have any.

I have seen plenty of the aftermarket U-joints, Borgeson and Flaming River, give up on high mile cars. The needles just break down after a while.

 

Wayfarer...any update? Curious to find out what the problem was.
Thanks
Eric

 

Same here!

 

Y[esterday, we replaced the tie rod ends, spindles, bearings,and front shocks. It got a lot better, but there's stilla disconnectwith the steering. [/I]

At this point it needs to have the toe set. No question.

The reason we replaced the spindles is that the passenger side had wallowed out the hole where the tie rod end attaches.

Now, what the hell made the tie rod end eat the steering ARM ? That needs to be corrected.

 

I have no idea what caused the hole to be wallowed out. Everything under there looks to be the way it should be. At least I think it is. I took some pictures yesterday, but all I had with me was my phone, so I did the best I could. The distance between the mounting points for the lower control arms is 24 1/2".