Register now to get rid of these ads!

Street Rod Engineering, anyone bought their MII kits?

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by Stevie Nash, Feb 7, 2011.

  1. Stevie Nash
    Joined: Oct 24, 2007
    Posts: 2,999

    Stevie Nash
    Member

    I'm looking at Street Rod Engineering for a MII setup. Primarily because they make a '37 Nash crossmember, whereas all the others only seem to offer a "universal" kit.

    Anyone bought their kits? Good quality?
     
  2. Stevie Nash
    Joined: Oct 24, 2007
    Posts: 2,999

    Stevie Nash
    Member

    bttt for the afternoon crowd...
     
  3. Stevie Nash
    Joined: Oct 24, 2007
    Posts: 2,999

    Stevie Nash
    Member

    The evening crowd....
     
  4. Deuce Roadster
    Joined: Sep 8, 2002
    Posts: 9,519

    Deuce Roadster
    Member Emeritus

    NEVER bought one ...
    but I would NOT install a Pinto/Mustang II under a car as big ( and heavy )
    as a 1937 Nash.

    [​IMG]

    :D
     

  5. I've installed many of their kits.

    Go for it!

    Tom's stuff is crude appearing compared to a Heidt's or TCI, as he uses box tube (1/4" wall which is overkill and HEAVY) for the crossmember, but it installs well and works well. His lower control arms are simplistic, but again, well made and VERY functional. I actually prefer them to the prettier ones.
     
  6. KJSR
    Joined: Mar 7, 2008
    Posts: 2,385

    KJSR
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from Utah
    1. Utah HAMBers

    I would have to agree, A Nash is pretty heavy...
     
  7. paintcan54
    Joined: Oct 27, 2007
    Posts: 1,100

    paintcan54
    Member

    I put one of Tom's kits under my '41 Ford sedan, had it in, in about 3 hours fit was good only had to shim a 1/8 on the fit much better then some of the other ones I have done. Like said his cross member is on the heavy side which I think is better then beeing to thin. I would buy one again if I need one.
     
  8. tommy v
    Joined: Mar 4, 2005
    Posts: 1,974

    tommy v
    Member

    i got my M II kit for a 37 nash from JPL, some of it was fatman stuff
     
  9. Stevie Nash
    Joined: Oct 24, 2007
    Posts: 2,999

    Stevie Nash
    Member

    Did you like it?
     
  10. Stevie Nash
    Joined: Oct 24, 2007
    Posts: 2,999

    Stevie Nash
    Member

    Hopefully will get some more eyes on this today. I've seen several 37 Nash MII conversions here on the HAMB, so I know it's not too heavy...
     
  11. atomickustom
    Joined: Aug 30, 2005
    Posts: 3,388

    atomickustom
    Member

    Everybody forgets that the actual Mustang II weighed more than you'd think (something like 3,400-3,500 pounds if memory serves) AND they were front-heavy cars AND the factory parts were all stamped sheet metal. There may be plenty of good reasons to not use an aftermarket MkII front suspension, but strength is not one of them!
     
  12. RAY With
    Joined: Mar 15, 2009
    Posts: 3,133

    RAY With
    Member

    I have used heidt's in 4 vehicles and one was a 3/4 ton truck. Each of there units was custom for the application and as to design you wont have any problems with the mustangII design or steering problems. I have never used Street rods stuff and cant see where their unit would be a problem at all. If you like the way they look go for it.
     
  13. Deuce Roadster
    Joined: Sep 8, 2002
    Posts: 9,519

    Deuce Roadster
    Member Emeritus

    Have you ever really weighed one ??? :confused:

    I have never had one cross the scales over 3,000 lbs and it had a bunch of old metal thrown in it. The newer Mustangs do weigh more than 3,000 lbs but the Mustang II and Pintos that the street rod kits came from were the 74 to 78 models. I scrapped a 77 Mustang II with a factory 5.0 and automatic. 2900 pounds ... with some metal junk yard trash thrown it.

    [​IMG]
     
  14. regardless of the original weight of an original Mustang II, The kit is well built and up to the task.

    As far as components go, The factory MII ball joints were also used on Full sized Fords, and the aftermarket stuff is full size Chrysler. The original components were all overbuilt for their original use. This is the part that the "haters" stubbornly refuse to acknowlege.

    AND, for the subframe vs. MII argument guys, the ball joints in a Camaro are dimensionally SMALLER than the factory MII.

    only part I don't like about aftermarket MII has been discussed on here many times, and that is the single shear mounting designs.
     
  15. 392_33
    Joined: Nov 30, 2010
    Posts: 174

    392_33
    Member

    I have one in my 33 Dodge with the tubular a arms and coilovers, works great. I have a spare MII kit for a 55 -57 Chev truck from HRE that i am planning to put in my 37-38 Nash Coupe (when i find one for sale)
     
  16. 49ratfink
    Joined: Feb 8, 2004
    Posts: 18,033

    49ratfink
    Member
    from California

    you would think that after all these years and so many MII kits having been installed in a wide variety of vehicles that the "that Nash is too big" club would have disbanded long ago.

    as for getting one for your NASH, I'd call FATMAN and see what they have to say. they seem to be good people. they may not be able to get you your kit, but you will definitly learn something.... maybe they need a good Nash to build one on, yours could be the prototype
     
  17. Topper
    Joined: Feb 2, 2010
    Posts: 90

    Topper
    Member

  18. pasadenahotrod
    Joined: Feb 13, 2007
    Posts: 11,776

    pasadenahotrod
    Member
    from Texas

    Before the "kits" were available many cars had the OEM 74-80 Pinto/74-78 Mustang II frontends installed after trimming the sheet metal away and making up strut rod brackets. Only drawback was the front-mounted stock rack and pinion steering which interfered with radiator aprons on early cars.

    I believe Progressive Automotive in MD(?) was the first to offer kits.
     
  19. Francisco Plumbero
    Joined: May 6, 2010
    Posts: 2,531

    Francisco Plumbero
    Member
    from il.

    No sorry, Somewhere in the 2550 to 2850 range with the ghia model being the heavy. You can google it out or search it, I think I actually posted the weights on here once. The 69 70 weighed in at 3250 ish. The newer ones are pigs though and weigh more, even though they look smaller.
    Coupe 2620
    Ghia 2860
    fastback 2699
    Mach 1 2793
    Weight dist 58 / 42
     
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2011
  20. Deuce Roadster
    Joined: Sep 8, 2002
    Posts: 9,519

    Deuce Roadster
    Member Emeritus

    AH ...
    a man who can read a weight scale :D

    The Pinto/Mustang II kit makers have told folks these cars were heavy for so long ... rodders believe it. :( It just is not so.

    A rodder here in my area put a Pinto/Mustang II kit under his 32 Nash ... and it would not stay in alignment. It would bend the A-arms. Now he did have a 454 BBC and a 400 Turbo ... and he had to use heavier front springs to hold the weight up ... but he got aftermarket A-arms after his original ones bend ... and the aftermarket ones bent also.

    He straighten them enough to align the car and then sold it.
    The new owner had the same issues so he sold.
    I do not know who has it now ... but I bet they are having problems with it.



    Not this 34 ... but his was like it but BLACK.

    [​IMG]

    Big, heavy car :)
     
  21. I saw a couple big block powered, MII suspended (Heidt's) street rods do this too---one a '41 Willys, I forget what the other was, pickup I think.....Heidt's has larger diameter tube control arms which solved it for both
     
  22. I bought one from Tom back in 1997 and put it in a 36 Dodge coupe with a 440 6 six pac.It has well over 20000 miles on it with NO trouble.
    Joe
     
  23. wingedexpress
    Joined: Dec 24, 2006
    Posts: 894

    wingedexpress

    I bought one years ago for a 36 international.Looked good and fit right but i sold it before getting to drive it on the road.
     
  24. Demon Seed
    Joined: Feb 2, 2009
    Posts: 106

    Demon Seed
    Member
    from BF-AZ

    With the Mustang II IFS, its not as much about the weight as the weight distribution. The Mustang II had approximately 60/40 (front/rear) weight distribution. With the 302 small block auto with AC and an all up weight of around 3000 lbs. That gives (60%) front weight over the suspension of 1800 lbs. or the equivalent of a 3600 lb. car with 50/50 weight distribution. My pro street car BBC, Heidts Mustang II IFS was built in the early 90's. Its on its 4th owner, still on the road and has had no issues with the Mustang II front suspension. The key however is to use stock Ford parts (not the Chinese import crap) and always use strut rods. Where you run into problems with the Mustang II IFS is when you use strut rod eliminator kits. The suspension was not designed for those and its just a matter of time before you bend or break something if you eliminate them.
     
  25. dontlifttoshift
    Joined: Sep 17, 2005
    Posts: 652

    dontlifttoshift
    Member

    maybe the better question is .....what's the track width on a 37 Nash?

    Perhaps a subframe is a better option. We did a 40 Buick with a new camaro stub from Heidts and it worked out very well. Original subframes are also becoming more available as those guys (musclecar geeks) replace the stock stuff with after market.
     

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.