TCCoA Forums banner
681 - 700 of 722 Posts

· Administrator
1997 Thunderbird LX
Joined
·
10,948 Posts
You could always change the thread title to "build(s) thread"!

Joe
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,223 Posts
You could always change the thread title to "build(s) thread"!

Joe
But they're both not MN12s? It'd be kinda misleading thread title.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
1,032 Posts
Discussion Starter · #688 ·
Yep. Anything more and I'm pulling the engine and cutting the car up and welding in a crossmember, and it would cost more also. I wanted to make some improvements to the fairly bad stock suspension without spending a ton of money.
 

· Administrator
1994 Cougar XR7 DOHC/5-Speed
Joined
·
23,912 Posts
Yep. Anything more and I'm pulling the engine and cutting the car up and welding in a crossmember, and it would cost more also. I wanted to make some improvements to the fairly bad stock suspension without spending a ton of money.
Yeah it’s a nice unintrusive solution, I didn’t know anything like that existed. It’s actually cool working within the confines of the stock layout, like something Shelby would have done back in the day if they had thought of it.
 

· Super Moderator
Joined
·
14,406 Posts
I left mine loose, so I can pull it out of the hood if I ever need to drive thru deep water. :)
 

· Registered
Ford Lincoln Mercury
Joined
·
401 Posts
Wow that looks like an improvement to the weird strut rod arrangement. I'd like to see an additional piece of tubing welded between the front and rear tubes to reduce flex.
What size tubing is used for the control arms? Either way it's a cool option keep us posted.
 

· Super Moderator
Joined
·
14,406 Posts
I've never seen steering gear like that; 69 what?
 

· Administrator
1994 Cougar XR7 DOHC/5-Speed
Joined
·
23,912 Posts
I've never seen steering gear like that; 69 what?
All Ford’s prior to 1971(ish) used that setup, the boxes are effectively manual, just with different ratios, Ford’s better idea was using a hydraulic ram to push on the linkage for boost rather than have it be integral to the box. Corvettes used this setup too, weirdly
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
1,032 Posts
Discussion Starter · #696 ·
All Ford’s prior to 1971(ish) used that setup, the boxes are effectively manual, just with different ratios, Ford’s better idea was using a hydraulic ram to push on the linkage for boost rather than have it be integral to the box. Corvettes used this setup too, weirdly
And Corvettes until 82 :ROFLMAO:
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
1,032 Posts
Discussion Starter · #697 ·
I would have assumed you'd convert it to a saginaw box, I never liked those ram ones

I considered it but on this car for this version of it cost is a major factor. The power box would have cost more than all the parts in the pic and I would have to convert the z-bar (which I have all new parts for already) to a cable or hydraulic clutch at a minimum cost of $250. A rack and pinion would have been even more. The control valve and ram are new not rebuilt so they will hopefully be good for a while :D. I addressed the major drivability issues with the suspension parts so I'm good with this for now.
 

· Super Moderator
Joined
·
14,406 Posts
Hell Yeah; nice cars. Matt, I guess I never had to work on the 63's 'rack' as it was.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
1,032 Posts
Discussion Starter · #700 ·
I would have assumed you'd convert it to a saginaw box, I never liked those ram ones
One other thing with the power box also is I would have to modify my tilt-away steering column which I really don't want to do. At this point that column setup itself is worth about $1,500.
 
681 - 700 of 722 Posts
Top